INTERPRETATION OF THE SUPREME PEOPLE'S COURT ON SOME MATTERS ABOUT THE APPLICATION OF LAW IN THE TRIAL OF CIVIL CASES INVOLVING UNFAIR COMPETITION
Announcement of the Supreme People's Court
Fa Shi [2007] No. 2
The Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Some Matters about the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Cases Involving Unfair Competition, has been adopted by the 1412th meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court on December 30, 2006. It is hereby promulgated and shall enter into force as of February 1, 2007. The Supreme People's Court
January 12, 2007
Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Some Matters about the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Cases Involving Unfair Competition
(Adopted at the 1412th meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court on December 30, 2006 )
For the purpose of correctly hearing the civil cases involving unfair competition, lawfully protecting the legitimate rights and interests of business operators, and maintaining the order of market competition, the present Interpretation is constituted in accordance with the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China, the Anti-unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China, and the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and in combination with the experiences and actual situation of the trial practice.
Article 1
Well-known commodities as stipulated in Subparagraph (2) of Article 5 of the Anti- unfair Competition Law refer to those commodities that have certain market popularity within the territory of China and are known by the public concerned. The people's court shall take into account the time, region, volume and targets for selling such commodities, the duration, degree and scope for any promotion of such commodities, as well as the protection situation as well-known commodities, and make comprehensive judgments when affirming well-known commodities. The burden of proof for the market popularity of commodities shall be assumed by the plaintiff.
In case an identical or similar name, package or ornament with that typical to a well- known commodity is used within a different region, it will not constitute the unfair competition as stipulated in Subparagraph (2) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law if the later user can prove its good faith in using it. Where the sources of commodities of the earlier user are confused due to the later business activities conducted
within the same zone, the people's court shall give support when the earlier user pleads the court to order the later to add other signs to make a distinction on the sources of its commodities.
Article 2
In case the name, package and ornament of commodities is the notable characteristics for distinguishing the source of commodities, it shall be deemed as the typical name, package and ornament as stipulated in Subparagraph (2) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law. In case of any of the following circumstances, the people's court shall not ascertain them as the typical name, package and ornament of well-known commodities:
(1)
the commonly-used name, graphics or model of the commodities;
(2)
the name of the commodities that just directly specifies the quality, major raw materials, functions, utilities, weight, quantity or any other characteristic of the commodities;
(3)
the shape produced due to the nature of the commodities, the shape of the commodities that should be produced for the purpose of obtaining technical effects, as well as the shape that produces substantial value to the commodities; or
(4)
other name, package or ornament of the commodities that has no notable characteristic.
In case the notable characteristic occurs upon use under any circumstance as stipulated in Subparagraph (1), (2) or (4) of the preceding paragraph, it can be regarded as a typical name, package and ornament.
In case the typical name, package or ornament of a well-known commodity includes the name, graphics, or model common to the said commodity in question, or directly indicates the quality, major raw materials, functions, utilities, weight, quantity or any other characteristic of the said commodity, or involves the name of the place, if it is used by any other party for narrating commodities impartially, it shall be deemed that an unfair competition is not constituted.
Article 3
In case the ornament of the business place, the pattern of business appliances, or the
clothes of operating personnel, and etc. constitutes an overall business image with a unique style, it may be ascertained as the ornament as stipulated in Subparagraph (2) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
Article 4
In case of any confusion concerning the source of a commodity in the public concerned, including the misapprehension of such a typical relationship as licensed use or affiliation with the business operator of a well-known commodity, it shall be regarded as causing the confusion with the well-known commodity of someone else, and making the consumers mistake it to be a well-known commodity as stipulated in Subparagraph (2) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
In case any identical name, package or ornament of a commodity or the one that is no difference with the forged one in terms of visual effect is used on the same commodity, it shall be deemed as sufficiently to cause the confusion with the well-known commodity of someone else.
The identity or similarity with the typical name, package or ornament of a well-known commodity may be ascertained with reference to the principles and methods for judging identical or similar trademarks.
Article 5
In case the name, package or ornament of a commodity is a sign that can not be used as a trademark as stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Trademark Law, if the party concerned applies to the court for protection in accordance with Subparagraph (2) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law, the people's court shall not give support.
Article 6
A name of any enterprise registered by the enterprise registration competent authority, or a name of any foreign enterprise used within the territory of China for commercial use shall be ascertained as an enterprise name as stipulated in Subparagraph (3) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law. A shop name in the name of enterprise that has certain market popularity and is acknowledged by the public concerned may be ascertained as a enterprise name as stipulated in Subparagraph (3) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
The name of any natural person used in the business operation of commodities shall be ascertained as a name as stipulated in Subparagraph (3) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law. The pen name or stage name of any natural person that has certain market popularity and is acknowledged by the public concerned may be ascertained as a name as stipulated in Subparagraph (3) of Article 5 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
Article 7
As regards the commercial use within the territory of China that includes the use of the typical name, package or ornament of a well-known commodity, or use of the enterprise title or name for a commodity, commodity packages or commodity exchange documents, or for advertisements, exhibitions or any other commercial activities, it shall be ascertained as the use as stipulated in Subparagraphs (2) and (3) of Article 5 of the Anti- unfair Competition Law.
Article 8
In case of any of the following acts committed by a business operator, if it is sufficient to cause the misapprehension of the public concerned, it may be ascertained as a false or misleading promotion as stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 9 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law:
(1)
implementing biased or contrastive promotion of commodities;
(2)
implementing the promotion of commodities by adopting unsure scientific viewpoints or phenomena as the facts for final conclusions; or
(3)
implementing the promotion of commodities by way of using vague language or other deceptive methods.
In case the commodities are publicized by way of obviously exaggerating, if it is insufficient to cause the misapprehension of the public concerned, it shall not be ascertained as the false or misleading promotion.
The people's court shall ascertain the false or misleading promotion in light of daily life experiences, the general attention of the public concerned, the fact misunderstood, as well as the reality of the promotion objects, and etc..
Article 9
If the related information may not be aware of by the related personnel in the field therefrom and is difficult to be obtained, it shall be ascertained as unknown to the public as stipulated in Paragraph 3 of Article 10 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
In case of any of the following circumstances, it may be ascertained that the related
information is not unknown to the public:
(1)
It is the common sense or industrial practice as known by people in the related technical or economic field;
(2)
It only involves the simple combination of dimensions, structures, materials and components of products, and can be directly obtained by observing the products by the public concerned after the products enter into the market;
(3)
It has been publicly revealed on any publication or any other mass medium;
(4)
It has been publicized by reports or exhibits;
(5)
It can be obtained through other public channels; or
(6)
It can be easily obtained with no price.
Article 10
In case the related information has practical or potential commercial value, and can be used for enhancing the competitive advantage for the obligee, it shall be ascertained as capable of bringing about benefits to the obligee, and having practical applicability as stipulated in Paragraph 3 of Article 10 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
Article 11
If the obligee takes proper protection measures that is suitable for the commercial value or any other specific circumstance for the purpose of avoiding information divulgence, it shall be deemed as confidentiality measures as stipulated in Paragraph 3 of Article 10 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
The people's court shall ascertain whether the obligee has taken confidentiality measures in accordance with the features of the related information carrier, the willingness for keeping secret of the obligee, the identifiability degree of the confidentiality measures,
the difficulty for others to obtain it by justifiable methods and other elements.
In case of any of the following normal circumstances that is sufficient to prevent the divulge of any classified information, it shall be ascertained that the obligee has taken the confidentiality measures:
(1)
To limit the access scope of the classified information, and the contents shall only be notified to related personnel that must be aware of the information;
(2)
To take such preventive measures as locking the carrier of the classified information up;
(3)
To tag a confidentiality sign on the carrier of classified information;
(4)
To adopt passwords or codes on the classified information;
(5)
To conclude a confidentiality agreement;
(6)
To limit visitors to the classified machinery, factory, workshop or any other place or bring forward any confidentiality request; or
(7)
Any other reasonable measure for guaranteeing the confidentiality of information.
Article 12
As regards obtaining business secrets through development and research by itself or reverse engineering, it shall not be ascertained as an infringement upon business secrets as stipulated in Subparagraphs (1) and (2) of Article 10 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law.
Reverse engineering referred to in the preceding paragraph means to obtain the related technical information on the products in technical methods by way of disassembling, mapping or analyzing the products gotten from public channels. Any party concerned that
knows the business secrets of someone else by unjustifiable methods and then claims its acquisition as lawful in excuse of reverse engineering shall not be supported.
Article 13
The name list of clients among business secrets generally refers to the special client information that is different from related public information, including the name, address, contact information, business habits, intent, and contents of the clients and comprise the name roll of clients that collects lots of customers as well as the specific customers that have kept a long-term and stable transaction relationship.
In case a client develops market transactions with the entity due to relying on an employee thereof, after this employee leaves his post, if it can be proved that this client voluntarily chooses to perform market transactions with the said employee or the new entity he works for, it shall be ascertained that no unfair methods has been adopted, except it is otherwise stipulated between this employee and the former entity.
Article 14
As regards any party concerned that claims that someone else has infringed upon its business secret, it shall be responsible for providing proof to verify that its business secret satisfies the statutory requirements, the information of the other party concerned is identical or substantially identical with its business secret, and the other party concerned has adopted unfair methods. Among others, the evidence for proving that its business secret satisfies the statutory requirements shall comprise the carrier, specific contents, and commercial value of this business secret as well as the specific confidentiality measures taken for this business secret.
Article 15
If the licensee of the license contract for sole use of the business secret raises an action as regards infringement upon any business secret, it shall be accepted by the people's court in accordance with related laws.
If the licensee of the license contract for exclusive use, jointly with the obligee, raises an action, or the licensee raises an action independently under the circumstance that the obligee may not do so, it shall be accepted by the people's court in accordance with the related laws.
If the licensee of the license contract for common use, jointly with the obligee, raises an action, or the licensee raises an action independently upon authorization of the obligee in written form, it shall be accepted by the people's court in accordance with the related laws.
Article 16
When the people's court make an adjudication of the civil liability to stop the infringement on any business secret, the time for stopping the infringement shall generally be prolonged to the time when this business secret has been aware of by the general public.
In case the time for stopping the infringement arbitrated in accordance with the preceding paragraph is clearly unacceptable, if it is under the circumstance that the competitive advantage of the obligee to this business secret is protected, the infringer may be ordered to stop using this business secret within a certain period or scope.
Article 17
As regards determining the damages for the acts infringing on business secrets as stipulated in Article 10 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law, it may be performed with reference to the methods of determining damages for patent infringements, and as regards determining the damages for the unfair competition acts as stipulated in Article 5 , 9 or 14 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law, it may be performed with reference to the methods of determining damages for infringing upon registered trademark rights.
If any business secret has been aware of by the general public due to any tort, the damages shall be determined subject to the commercial value of this business secret. The commercial value of this business secret shall be ascertained in light of such elements as the research and development costs, the income from implementing this business secret, possible benefits, and the time for maintaining the competitive advantage, and etc..
Article 18
The power to adjudicate the civil cases of the first instance concerning the unfair competition as stipulated in Article 5 , 9, 10 or 14 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law shall generally remain with the intermediate people's court.
Each higher people's court may determine some grass-roots people's courts to accept the civil cases of the first instance concerning unfair competition in accordance with the actual situation of its jurisdiction and upon approval of the Supreme People's Court, and those grass-roots people's courts that have been approved to hear civil cases regarding intellectual property may continue the acceptance of cases concerning unfair competition.
Article 19
The present Interpretation shall enter into force as of February 1, 2007. The Supreme People's Court 2007-01-12
《最高人民法院关于审理不正当竞争民事案件应用法律若干问题的解释》
全文
为了正确审理不正当竞争民事案件，依法保护经营者的合法权益，维护市场竞争秩序，依照《 中华人民共和国民法通则 》、《 中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法 》、《 中华人民共和国民事诉讼法 》等法律的有关规定，结合审判实践经验和实际情况，制定本解释。 第一条 在中国境内具有一定的市场知名度，为相关公众所知悉的商品，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定的“知名商品”。人民法院认定知名商品，应当考虑该商品的销售时间、销售区域、销售额和销售对象，进行任何宣传的持续时间、程度和地域范围，作为知名商品受保护的情况等因素，进行综合判断。原告应当对其商品的市场知名度负举证责任。 在不同地域范围内使用相同或者近似的知名商品特有的名称、包装、装潢，在后使用者能够证明其善意使用的，不构成反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定的不正当竞争行为。因后来的经营活动进入相同地域范围而使其商品来源足以产生混淆，在先使用者请求责令在后使用者附加足以区别商品来源的其他标识的，人民法院应当予以支持。 第二条 具有区别商品来源的显著特征的商品的名称、包装、装潢，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定的“特有的名称、包装、装潢”。有下列情形之一的，人民法院不认定为知名商品特有的名称、包装、装潢： （一）商品的通用名称、图形、型号； （二）仅仅直接表示商品的质量、主要原料、功能、用途、重量、数量及其他特点的商品名称； （三）仅由商品自身的性质产生的形状，为获得技术效果而需有的商品形状以及使商品具有实质性价值的形状； （四）其他缺乏显著特征的商品名称、包装、装潢。 前款第（一）、（二）、（四）项规定的情形经过使用取得显著特征的，可以认定为特有的名称、包装、装潢。 知名商品特有的名称、包装、装潢中含有本商品的通用名称、图形、型号，或者直接表示商品的质量、主要原料、功能、用途、重量、数量以及其他特点，或者含有地名，他人因客观叙述商品而正当使用的，不构成不正当竞争行为。 第三条 由经营者营业场所的装饰、营业用具的式样、营业人员的服饰等构成的具有独特风格的整体营业形象，可以认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定的“装潢”。 第四条 足以使相关公众对商品的来源产生误认，包括误认为与知名商品的经营者具有许可使用、关联企业关系等特定联系的，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定的“造成和他人的知名商品相混淆，使购买者误认为是该知名商品”。 在相同商品上使用相同或者视觉上基本无差别的商品名称、包装、装潢，应当视为足以造成和他人知名商品相混淆。 认定与知名商品特有名称、包装、装潢相同或者近似，可以参照商标相同或者近似的判断原则和方法。 第五条 商品的名称、包装、装潢属于商标法第十条第一款规定的不得作为商标使用的标志，当事人请求依照反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定予以保护的，人民法院不予支持。 第六条 企业登记主管机关依法登记注册的企业名称，以及在中国境内进行商业使用的外国（地区）企业名称，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（三）项规定的“企业名称”。具有一定的市场知名度、为相关公众所知悉的企业名称中的字号，可以认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（三）项规定的“企业名称”。 在商品经营中使用的自然人的姓名，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（三）项规定的“姓名”。具有一定的市场知名度、为相关公众所知悉的自然人的笔名、艺名等，可以认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（三）项规定的“姓名”。 第七条 在中国境内进行商业使用，包括将知名商品特有的名称、包装、装潢或者企业名称、姓名用于商品、商品包装以及商品交易文书上，或者用于广告宣传、展览以及其他商业活动中，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项、第（三）项规定的“使用”。 第八条 经营者具有下列行为之一，足以造成相关公众误解的，可以认定为反不正当竞争法第九条第一款规定的引人误解的虚假宣传行为： （一）对商品作片面的宣传或者对比的； （二）将科学上未定论的观点、现象等当作定论的事实用于商品宣传的； （三）以歧义性语言或者其他引人误解的方式进行商品宣传的。 以明显的夸张方式宣传商品，不足以造成相关公众误解的，不属于引人误解的虚假宣传行为。 人民法院应当根据日常生活经验、相关公众一般注意力、发生误解的事实和被宣传对象的实际情况等因素，对引人误解的虚假宣传行为进行认定。 第九条 有关信息不为其所属领域的相关人员普遍知悉和容易获得，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第十条第三款规定的“不为公众所知悉”。 具有下列情形之一的，可以认定有关信息不构成不为公众所知悉： （一）该信息为其所属技术或者经济领域的人的一般常识或者行业惯例； （二）该信息仅涉及产品的尺寸、结构、材料、部件的简单组合等内容，进入市场后相关公众通过观察产品即可直接获得； （三）该信息已经在公开出版物或者其他媒体上公开披露； （四）该信息已通过公开的报告会、展览等方式公开； （五）该信息从其他公开渠道可以获得； （六）该信息无需付出一定的代价而容易获得。 第十条 有关信息具有现实的或者潜在的商业价值，能为权利人带来竞争优势的，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第十条第三款规定的“能为权利人带来经济利益、具有实用性”。 第十一条 权利人为防止信息泄漏所采取的与其商业价值等具体情况相适应的合理保护措施，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第十条第三款规定的“保密措施”。 人民法院应当根据所涉信息载体的特性、权利人保密的意愿、保密措施的可识别程度、他人通过正当方式获得的难易程度等因素，认定权利人是否采取了保密措施。 具有下列情形之一，在正常情况下足以防止涉密信息泄漏的，应当认定权利人采取了保密措施： （一）限定涉密信息的知悉范围，只对必须知悉的相关人员告知其内容； （二）对于涉密信息载体采取加锁等防范措施； （三）在涉密信息的载体上标有保密标志； （四）对于涉密信息采用密码或者代码等； （五）签订保密协议； （六）对于涉密的机器、厂房、车间等场所限制来访者或者提出保密要求； （七）确保信息秘密的其他合理措施。 第十二条 通过自行开发研制或者反向工程等方式获得的商业秘密，不认定为反不正当竞争法第十条第(一)、（二）项规定的侵犯商业秘密行为。 前款所称“反向工程”，是指通过技术手段对从公开渠道取得的产品进行拆卸、测绘、分析等而获得该产品的有关技术信息。当事人以不正当手段知悉了他人的商业秘密之后，又以反向工程为由主张获取行为合法的，不予支持。 第十三条 商业秘密中的客户名单，一般是指客户的名称、地址、联系方式以及交易的习惯、意向、内容等构成的区别于相关公知信息的特殊客户信息，包括汇集众多客户的客户名册，以及保持长期稳定交易关系的特定客户。 客户基于对职工个人的信赖而与职工所在单位进行市场交易，该职工离职后，能够证明客户自愿选择与自己或者其新单位进行市场交易的，应当认定没有采用不正当手段，但职工与原单位另有约定的除外。 第十四条 当事人指称他人侵犯其商业秘密的，应当对其拥有的商业秘密符合法定条件、对方当事人的信息与其商业秘密相同或者实质相同以及对方当事人采取不正当手段的事实负举证责任。其中，商业秘密符合法定条件的证据，包括商业秘密的载体、具体内容、商业价值和对该项商业秘密所采取的具体保密措施等。 第十五条 对于侵犯商业秘密行为，商业秘密独占使用许可合同的被许可人提起诉讼的，人民法院应当依法受理。 排他使用许可合同的被许可人和权利人共同提起诉讼，或者在权利人不起诉的情况下，自行提起诉讼，人民法院应当依法受理。 普通使用许可合同的被许可人和权利人共同提起诉讼，或者经权利人书面授权，单独提起诉讼的，人民法院应当依法受理。 第十六条 人民法院对于侵犯商业秘密行为判决停止侵害的民事责任时，停止侵害的时间一般持续到该项商业秘密已为公众知悉时为止。 依据前款规定判决停止侵害的时间如果明显不合理的，可以在依法保护权利人该项商业秘密竞争优势的情况下，判决侵权人在一定期限或者范围内停止使用该项商业秘密。 第十七条 确定反不正当竞争法第十条规定的侵犯商业秘密行为的损害赔偿额，可以参照确定侵犯专利权的损害赔偿额的方法进行；确定反不正当竞争法第五条、第九条、第十四条规定的不正当竞争行为的损害赔偿额，可以参照确定侵犯注册商标专用权的损害赔偿额的方法进行。 因侵权行为导致商业秘密已为公众所知悉的，应当根据该项商业秘密的商业价值确定损害赔偿额。商业秘密的商业价值，根据其研究开发成本、实施该项商业秘密的收益、可得利益、可保持竞争优势的时间等因素确定。 第十八条 反不正当竞争法第五条、第九条、第十条、第十四条规定的不正当竞争民事第一审案件，一般由中级人民法院管辖。 各高级人民法院根据本辖区的实际情况，经最高人民法院批准，可以确定若干基层人民法院受理不正当竞争民事第一审案件，已经批准可以审理知识产权民事案件的基层人民法院，可以继续受理。 第十九条 本解释自二〇〇七年二月一日起施行。