5 ms·
That sounds a lot like trademark infringement, not copyright infringement.
by ugh 15y ago
That sounds a lot like trademark infringement, not copyright infringement.
- redthrowaway 15y agoI'm far from an expert in Chinese law, but I could see the two being reasonably treated as equivalent.
- dctoedt 15y agoTrademarks and copyrights aren't equivalent. I'm not licensed to practice in China, but from everything I've ever read, Chinese law [1] isn't so different (at this level) from that of other countries. TRADEMARKS: Generally speaking, a trademark is something that signifies or evokes a product provided, sponsored, or endorsed by a particular source. TRADEMARK EXAMPLES: * Word marks such as Apple and iPad; * Logos such as the apple logo; * Sounds such as the "Intel inside" sequence of notes; * Colors, even (sometimes) such as pink for Owens-Corning-brand attic insulation. (Trademarks are for products; service marks serve the same function for services.) In a sense, the "owner" of a trademark is really just its government-appointed custodian or guardian. (It's sort of like the old joke: Dogs have masters, cats have staff.) When a trademark owner enforces its rights against an infringer, what the owner is really doing is performing a public service, namely keeping the market free of marks that would be likely to confuse the public. COPYRIGHT: In contrast, copyright applies to original works of "authorship," regardless whether associated with a product or service. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_the_Peoples_Republic_of_China#National_legal_framework http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_the_Pe...
- PakG1 15y agoFurther analysis seems to say that this was indeed a poor translation. It's a trademark case, not a copyright case. ugh was on the mark.