The final trial of YY infringement dream west tour case huaduo gains 40 million and Netease claims 20 million

Recently, the civil judgment of the second instance of copyright infringement and unfair competition dispute between Guangzhou Netease computer system Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Netease company) and Guangzhou huaduo Network Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as huaduo company) (civil judgment of Guangdong Higher People's court, [2018] yueminzhong No. 137) released by China judicial document network shows that the judgment is Final judgment, rejection of the appeal and maintenance of the original judgment. Guangdong Higher People's Court pointed out that in this case, huaduo company can be judged to compensate for the economic losses and reasonable rights maintenance expenses of Netease company, totaling 20 million yuan. The amount of compensation finally determined by the court of first instance is not obviously improper, and the amount of compensation awarded can be maintained.

According to the data, Guangzhou huaduo Network Technology Co., Ltd. was founded in 2005 by Li Xueling, a famous it journalist. Lei Jun is its angel investor. Guangzhou huaduo Network Technology Co., Ltd. is the main operating company in the happy gathering era. According to the official website of huanju times, huanju times group was founded in April 2005 and is a social media platform for globalization. It was listed on NASDAQ on November 21, 2012. Its business covers live broadcast, short video, social networking, e-commerce, education, finance and other fields. Its core products include YY, Huya live broadcast, IMO, bigolive, likee, Hago, etc. Huya was listed on the NYSE on May 11, 2018, becoming the first listed company incubated within the group.

It is reported that in August 2013, Netease company sent a letter to huaduo company in the form of written email and e-mail, saying that Netease company found that huaduo company illegally injected plug-in programs into Fantasy Westward games and other games through the game live function module of YY voice software, directly and illegally displayed YY direct broadcast icons and controls, seriously affecting the normal operation of the game, interface layout and client stability, It has a great negative impact on many Netease players.

Guangzhou intellectual property court of the first instance held that the dispute in this case was brought after Netease company found that the online platform operated by huaduo company broadcast the game involved in the case and failed to negotiate. Netease claims in the lawsuit that the game involved in the case belongs to computer software works, the characters, scenes and props presented in the process of game operation belong to art works, the music in the process of game operation belongs to music works, the plot design, interpretation description and activity scheme of the game belong to literal works, and the continuous dynamic picture presented in the process of game operation belongs to similar electronic works, accusing huaduo of infringing its works Copyright, and constitute unfair competition.

First instance court decision: first, from the date of the legal effect of the decision, huaduo company stopped disseminating the video game "dream Westward Journey" or "dream Westward Journey 2" through the information network. 2、 Within ten days from the date of the legal effect of the judgment, huaduo company shall compensate Netease company for the economic loss of 20 million yuan. 3、 Reject other claims of Netease.

In the first instance, Netease claimed economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling 100 million yuan.

The judgment of the second instance shows that the economic benefits generated by live broadcasting of the game are based on the game itself and in the process of game picture transmission, not the dividends brought by the technology itself purely based on technological progress. The copyright owners of the disseminated works shall enjoy the corresponding share of the dividends brought about by the progress of network communication technology. Even if the game live broadcasting platform and the game host have made positive contributions to the development of the game live broadcasting industry, the right of exclusive control of the game copyright owners over the dissemination of their works cannot be denied.

The starting point of the tort compensation in this case is October 2011. With regard to the illegal income of huaduo company, Guangdong Higher People's Court pointed out that considering the actual profit situation of the emerging game live broadcasting industry at that time, the court comprehensively estimated that the total profit of huaduo company from October 2011 to December 2014 was about 40 million yuan.

As for the amount of compensation, Guangdong Higher People's court holds that huaduo company can be judged to compensate for the economic losses and reasonable rights maintenance expenses of Netease company totaling 20 million yuan in this case. The amount of compensation finally determined by the court of first instance is not obviously improper, and the amount of compensation awarded can be maintained.

Finally, the Guangdong Higher People's court said that the business model of the game live broadcasting should be licensed does not exclude the right punishment of the game copyright owner, and the copyright owner's right to license cannot be denied because the game copyright owner implements the free license based on the promotion of specific games or other commercial factors. Under the premise of respecting the market rules and the legitimate rights and interests of each other, the game copyright owner, the game live broadcasting party and other subjects shall fully negotiate and determine a reasonable way of licensing the game live broadcasting, so as to achieve mutual benefit and win-win results, and jointly promote the healthy and orderly development of the game and the game live broadcasting industry.