Reach for Gold: IP and Sports” was the theme set via WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation) for this 12 months’ World Intellectual Property Day on 26 April 2019. As part of the attention-raising tasks in China, the first Forum for Sports and Intellectual Property become held within the campus of Beijing Sport University(北京体育大学)where members mentioned the modern-day troubles surrounding highbrow property protection regarding sports activities.

What specially drew the writer’s interest is how hard it’s far for authorised broadcasters of live sports activities activities (i.E. The rights holder) to assert their rights in opposition to entities engaged in the unauthorised livestreaming of the same event at the internet. Most of the broadcasters who’ve delivered claims to Court have argued that the published changed into a “work” capable of protection below the PRC Copyright Law. However, as thus far the courts have not agreed.

This article examines the current case law (which exemplifies the modern-day barriers facing broadcasters) and analyses the principle issues, namely:

whether live/real-time publicizes qualify as “works” that may be blanketed via PRC Copyright Law; and

why the Courts are unwilling to take a new expansive interpretation of PRC Copyright Law so that it could apply to new types of infringement emerging from technological developments (which includes live streaming).

By way of synopsis, until the Copyright Law and applicable rules are amended, or the Supreme People’s Court issues judicial interpretation or case steering with recognize to online live streaming, it presently appears vital for broadcasting rights holders to discover alternative criminal arguments past Copyright Law to protect in opposition to unauthorized live streaming in China. The writer invites rights holders and relevant stakeholders to paintings on legal opportunity cases primarily based on belongings rights – the distinct proper to commercially benefit from live streaming of sporting activities, as one of the viable answers.

In the dispute between CCTV Network and Wo Ai Liao Internet Technology, Wo Ai Liao launched an internet application that allowed users to get entry to applications on CCTV Network, which include the actual-time show of the 2012 London Olympics, without the authorization of CCTV Network.

The courtroom of first instance, recommended by way of Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court, took the view that wearing activities productions fell brief of “works” underneath PRC Copyright Law. Although CCTV Network could depend upon a TV station’s right to prevent unauthorized rebroadcasting or copying of its applications, the relevant provision, Article 45 of the PRC Copyright Law, become not meant to extend the right to online streaming.Five The Court indicated its “reluctance” to increase the legislative intention in reality due to the emergence of a brand new era.

Wo Ai Liao became finally ordered to compensate CCTV Network the modest amount of RMB400,000 (c.$fifty eight,000) for violation of Article 2(1) of the PRC Competition Law on the basis that Wo Ai Liao’s unauthorised live streaming diverted site visitors from CCTV Network and therefore disadvantaged CCTV Network of enterprise opportunity.6

In CCTV Network v. Hua Xia Cheng Shi Internet TV, the alleged violation turned into much like the Wo Ai Liao case, handiest bearing on instead to the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil. The courtroom of first example, Shenzhen Futian District People’s Court, held that wearing activities productions could not qualify for “works” underneath the PRC Copyright Law due to carrying activities’ unpredictability and absence of originality. However, the court become once more willing to compensate CCTV Network below the PRC Competition Law in the quantity of RMB120,000 (c$17,000), a good deal much less than the claim of RMB four million. The number of damages turned into decided with the aid of the court in its discretion, contemplating the duration of unauthorized live streaming, the recognition of the sporting occasions involved (i.E., The FIFA World Cup held in Brazil), as well as the viewing habits of the audience and so forth.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *