Computer Software Infringement Case Reheard in GuangzhouA computer software infringement case involving Hong Kong was reheard October 10 in the Guangdong Supreme People's Court. This has roused wide concerns among media, and the case was added with the American Ardent Company (successor of UI Company) and the Kenkon, the third party according to the verdict declared by the Supreme People's Court. This is a case ever heard in China that has so far claimed the highest amount of compensation for computer software.In 1995, Guangzhou Avon Company adopted software system provided by American Jenkon Co. and paid 15,000 US dollars to UI Company, the manufacturer of the software, for buying the direct technology support. In August 1997, PU Company/ Beijing Jingyan Company filed a case to the Guangdong Supreme People's Court, accusing that the Avon (without being authorized by PU) made an infringement on the PU's (already registered in China Software Registration Center) copyright, and claiming that Avon and Jenkon should compensate 30 million US dollars entailed therefrom in the cause of copyright infringement. On August 27, 1997, Jenkon announced its cancellation in America. Accordingly, PU/Jingyan withdrew its prosecution against Jenkon, and claimed that Avon should take up the responsibility of all compensations. On June 18, 1998, Guangdong Supreme Court sentenced Avon to indemnify 12 million US dollars, thus creating the highest amount of compensation in the handling of computer software cases in China. Avon refused to accept the verdict and entered an appeal. Three focal points were involved when the case was brought up to the appeal: first, the authorization of the software being used by Avon in China, secondly, whether Avon's behavior of purchasing, using and copying the software constituted any infringement, and thirdly, should it be a case of infringement, how much would Avon have to compensate for? Up to now, disputes incurred by the same case has been solved in America through proceedings and arbitration. The tort accusation of Ardent was ruled a penalty of 3.59 million US dollars for the compensation. The proceeding of PU/ Jingyan is similar to this one. On October 10, PU Company made a change of its proceeding claims at the court hearing. It requires that Ardent and Avon should stop the action of tort and make apology in the public, and the Ardent and Avon, the two companies involving in infringement shall have to make 26 million US dollars in compensation for Jingyan Company, and Avon shall compensate 4 million US dollars to PU. In view of the plaintiff's provisional change in the proceedings, and the defendant and the third parties request for recess, the court agreed to another hearing with the date to be specified later. |
| People's Daily Online --- http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/ |