A seemingly "ordinary" intellectual property rights protection case, only because the plaintiffs attorney made an unexpected discovery in the preparation before the court, submitted a supplementary evidence, the development direction of the whole case changed, resulting in the defendant two Baobao company, who thought they were not responsible, was judged to bear t and several liability for the infringement of the defendant one.
abbreviature of adjudication
Internet service providers (ISPs) must ensure efficient complaint processing channels rather than becoming information black holes. Given the complexity and diversity of infringement cases, particularly the types of unfair competition involved in this case, requiring platforms to accurately determine infringement based solely on complainants brief descriptions and limited evidence clearly exceeds their statutory obligations. The complained party should independently assess product compliance and determine whether to cease infringing activities. However, Taobao.com directly dismissed the complaint without fulfilling its duty to forward notifications, resulting in the complained party receiving no infringement warnings about the disputed products before filing legal action. This oversight allowed the infringement to persist and caused expanded damages. Consequently, Taobao.com bears significant fault and should be held tly liable with the store operator for the aggravated damages caused by the infringement.
Summary of judicial documents
First instance court/case number
Dalian Xigang District Peoples Court
(2024) Liao 0203 Min Chu No.4194
Court of second instance/Case number
Dalian Intermediate Peoples Court
(2025) Liao 02 Min Zhong 4660
cause of action
Unfair competition disputes
party
Plaintiff (appellee): Xiamen Cai Culture Media Co., LTD
Defendant 1: Zhang XX
Defendant 2 (appellant): Zhejiang Baobao Network Co., LTD
First instance judgment
Zhang compensated Cai cultural Company for its economic losses;
Zhejiang Baobao Network Company shall be tly and severally liable for 20% of the compensation amount of Zhang.
II. Judgment of the second instance
The appellant withdrew his appeal and the first-instance judgment became legally effective
Time of second trial
July 15,2025
Articles of law involved
Article 6 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the Peoples Republic of China
Article 1195 of the Civil Code of the Peoples Republic of China
Case notes
Unexpected discovery in pre-trial preparation changes trial strategy
Before trial proceedings commence, attorneys must conduct a thorough review of case materials, identify key issues, and prepare for court appearances. During this preparatory phase, the lead attorney unexpectedly discovered crucial evidence regarding Defendant Twos t liability that had been omitted from initial filings. This critical discovery fundamentally ed the case trajectory. After supplementing the evidence, the original single-track strategy targeting Defendant Ones unfair competition claims evolved a dual litigation approach addressing both unfair competition and e-commerce platform t liability. The complexity and challenges of the trial proceedings were significantly elevated as a result.
In the face of the defense pressure from both defendants, focus on the main line of the case
In response to Defendant Ones defense claims, the legal counsel focused on clarifying the plaintiffs intellectual property rights and establishing unfair competition as the basis for holding Defendant Two tly and severally liable. Defendant Two consistently invoked exemption defenses based on its status as an internet service provider. The counsel emphasized Article 1195 of the Civil Codes "notice-and-takedown" rule regarding platforms notification obligations, presenting evidence that Defendant Two only addressed one of the plaintiffs two simultaneous complaints while rejecting the other. To prove Defendant Twos fault, the counsel utilized legally recognized "preliminary evidence" by comparing the content of both complaints, demonstrating that the plaintiffs complaint notice complied with legal requirements and effectively countering Defendant Twos various defenses.
He calmly dealt with the appeal of a certain company, and answered it one by one. "We will subdue the enemy without fighting."
The appeal filed by a certain Baobao Company proved more aggressive than in the first instance. The defense attorney responded calmly and maintained rigorous preparation, meticulously crafting rebuttal materials that specifically referenced trial proceedings from the initial hearing. By exposing contradictions and inconsistencies in the companys arguments and presenting new evidence from the first-instance judgment, we effectively countered their claims. After multiple rounds of pre-trial negotiations following the cases registration, Baobao ultimately withdrew its appeal, allowing us to achieve a decisive victory without direct confrontation.
