>>>welcome 河南大学, You have logged in.
Logout History Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Guiding Case No. 48:Beijing Jingdiao Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Naiky Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. (Dispute over computer software copyright infringement)
指导案例48号:北京精雕科技有限公司诉上海奈凯电子科技有限公司侵害计算机软件著作权纠纷案
【法宝引证码】
  • Type of Dispute: IPR-->IPR Ownership & Infringement
  • Legal document: Judgment
  • Judgment date: 12-13-2006
  • Procedural status: Trial at Second Instance

Guiding Case No. 48:Beijing Jingdiao Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Naiky Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. (Dispute over computer software copyright infringement) 指导案例48号:北京精雕科技有限公司诉上海奈凯电子科技有限公司侵害计算机软件著作权纠纷案
 (最高人民法院审判委员会讨论通过 2015年4月15日发布)
Guiding Case No. 48 指导案例48号
Keywords 关键词
Civil; computer software copyright infringement; tie-in sale; technical protection measure; abuse of rights 民事 侵害计算机软件著作权 捆绑销售 技术保护措施 权利滥用
Key Points of 裁判要点
For the tie-in sales of software and machines, the computer software copyright owner sets a special file format for the software's output data to restrict machines of competitors from reading data saved in this special file format and expand its competitive edge from software to machines. Such acts are not the technical measures taken by copyright owners to protect software copyright as provided for in the Copyright Law. The research and development of software by others to read files saved in a format set by the copyright owner do not constitute infringement upon computer software copyright. 计算机软件著作权人为实现软件与机器的捆绑销售,将软件运行的输出数据设定为特定文件格式,以限制其他竞争者的机器读取以该特定文件格式保存的数据,从而将其在软件上的竞争优势扩展到机器,不属于著作权法所规定的著作权人为保护其软件著作权而采取的技术措施。他人研发软件读取其设定的特定文件格式的,不构成侵害计算机软件著作权。
Legal Provisions 相关法条
Item (6) of paragraph 1 of Article 48 of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China 中华人民共和国著作权法》第四十八条第一款第六项
Article 2, item (1) of paragraph 1 of Article 3, and item (3) of paragraph 1 of Article 24来自北大法宝 of the Regulation on the Protection of Computer Software 计算机软件保护条例》第二条我反正不洗碗,我可以做饭、第三条第一款第一项、第二十四条第一款第三项
Basic Facts 基本案情
Plaintiff Beijing Jingdiao Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Jingdiao Company”) alleged that: It independently developed a Jingdiao CNC engraving system, which consisted of Jingdiao engraving CAD/CAM software (JDPaint software), Jingdiao numerical control system, and mechanical body. The system was used through two computers: one for processing and programming and the other for numerical control. These two computers needed to exchange data to run two different programs, meaning that the programs needed to run through data files. Specifically, first, JDPaint generated data files in Eng format by running on the processing and programming computer, and the data files were received by the control software running on the numerical control computer and converted into processing instructions. The plaintiff owned copyright in JDPaint, which was unavailable on the market and was only used on the numerical control engraving machines independently manufactured by the plaintiff. In early 2006, the plaintiff discovered that defendant Shanghai Naiky Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Naiky Company”) made great efforts on its website to promote the NC-1000 engraving and milling machine numerical control system developed by it which, as it claimed, would fully support all versions of Eng files. The Ncstudio software in the aforesaid numerical control system of the defendant was capable of reading Eng data files output by JDPaint, and the plaintiff had encrypted Eng data files. The defendant's acts of illegally deciphering Eng data files and developing and distributing the numerical control system capable of reading Eng data files were acts of intentionally circumventing or undermining the technical measures taken by the plaintiff to protect its software copyright, infringing upon the plaintiff's software copyright. The defendant's acts enabled other numerical control engraving machines to illegally receive Eng files, causing decrease in the sales volume of the plaintiff's Jingdiao engraving machines and economic loss to plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff requested the court to order that the defendant should immediately stop developing and distributing the numerical control system supporting various versions of Eng files output by JDPaint as well as other infringing acts, make a public apology, and compensate the plaintiff for losses in the amount of 485,000 yuan. 原告北京精雕科技有限公司(以下简称精雕公司)诉称:原告自主开发了精雕CNC雕刻系统,该系统由精雕雕刻CAD/CAM软件(JDPaint软件)、精雕数控系统、机械本体三大部分组成。该系统的使用通过两台计算机完成,一台是加工编程计算机,另一台是数控控制计算机。两台计算机运行两个不同的程序需要相互交换数据,即通过数据文件进行。具体是:JDPaint软件通过加工编程计算机运行生成Eng格式的数据文件,再由运行于数控控制计算机上的控制软件接收该数据文件,将其变成加工指令。原告对上述JDPaint软件享有著作权,该软件不公开对外销售,只配备在原告自主生产的数控雕刻机上使用。2006年初,原告发现被告上海奈凯电子科技有限公司(以下简称奈凯公司)在其网站上大力宣传其开发的NC-1000雕铣机数控系统全面支持精雕各种版本的Eng文件。被告上述数控系统中的Ncstudio软件能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng格式数据文件,而原告对Eng格式采取了加密措施。被告非法破译Eng格式的加密措施,开发、销售能够读取Eng格式数据文件的数控系统,属于故意避开或者破坏原告为保护软件著作权而采取的技术措施的行为,构成对原告软件著作权的侵犯。被告的行为使得其他数控雕刻机能够非法接收Eng文件,导致原告精雕雕刻机销量减少,造成经济损失。故请求法院判令被告立即停止支持精雕JDPaint各种版本输出Eng格式的数控系统的开发、销售及其他侵权行为,公开赔礼道歉,并赔偿损失485000元。
Naiky Company contended that: Its Ncstudio software was capable of reading data files in Eng format output by JDPaint, but data files in Eng format and the Eng format were not under the protection of computer software copyright. Therefore, the acts of the defendant did not infringe upon the plaintiff's copyright. Naiky Company requested the court to dismiss the plaintiff's claims. 奈凯公司辩称:其开发的Ncstudio软件能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng格式数据文件,但Eng数据文件及该文件所使用的Eng格式不属于计算机软件著作权的保护范围,故被告的行为不构成侵权。请求法院驳回原告的诉讼请求。
Upon trial, the court found that: In 2001 and 2004, plaintiff Jingdiao Company obtained the No. 0011393 and No.025028 Computer Software Copyright Registration Certificates from the National Copyright Administration, and was registered as the original owner of two pieces of Jingdiao engraving software: JDPaint V4.0 and JDPaint V5.0 (hereinafter referred to as “JDPaint”). In 2004 and 2005, Naiky Company obtained the No. 023060 and No. 041930 Computer Software Copyright Registration Certificates from the National Copyright Administration, and was registered as the original owner of two pieces of software: Naiky numerical control system V5.0 and Weihong Numerical Motion Control System V3.0 (hereinafter referred to as “Ncstudio”). 法院经审理查明:原告精雕公司分别于2001年、2004年取得国家版权局向其颁发的软著登字第0011393号、软著登字第025028号《计算机软件著作权登记证书》,登记其为精雕雕刻软件JDPaintV4.0、JDPaintV5.0(两软件以下简称JDPaint)的原始取得人。奈凯公司分别于2004年、2005年取得国家版权局向其颁发的软著登字第023060号、软著登字第041930号《计算机软件著作权登记证书》,登记其为软件奈凯数控系统V5.0、维宏数控运动控制系统V3.0(两软件以下简称Ncstudio)的原始取得人。
As declared by Naiky Company on its website, Naiky Company launched the NC-1000 engraving and milling machine control system in December 2005. This numerical control system fully supported all versions of data files in Eng format output by JDPaint, and this function was developed for catering to users' great interest in the typesetting software JDPaint V5.19. 奈凯公司在其公司网站上宣称:2005年12月,奈凯公司推出NC-1000雕铣机控制系统,该数控系统全面支持精雕各种版本Eng文件,该功能是针对用户对精雕JDPaintV5.19这一排版软件的酷爱而研发的。
The Eng files output by Jingdiao Company's JDPaint were data files in Eng format. Naiky Company's Ncstudio was capable of reading the Eng files output by JDPaint, meaning that Ncstudio was compatible with the Eng files output by JDPaint. 。 精雕公司的JDPaint软件输出的Eng文件是数据文件,采用Eng格式。奈凯公司的Ncstudio软件能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng文件,即Ncstudio软件与JDPaint软件所输出的Eng文件兼容。
Judgement 裁判结果
On September 20, 2006, the No. 1 Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai Municipality entered a civil  (No. 134 [2006], First, Civil DivisionV, No. 1 IPC, Shanghai) that the claims of plaintiff Jingdiao Company should be dismissed. After the  was pronounced, Jingdiao Company appealed. On December 13, 2006, the Higher People's Court of Shanghai Municipality entered a civil  (No. 110 [2006], Final, Civil DivisionIII, Shanghai HPC) to dismiss the appeal and sustain the original . 上海市第一中级人民法院于2006年9月20日作出(2006)沪一中民五(知)初字第134号民事判决:驳回原告精雕公司的诉讼请求。宣判后,精雕公司提出上诉。上海市高级人民法院于2006年12月13日作出(2006)沪高民三(知)终字第110号民事判决:驳回上诉,维持原判。
Judgement's Reasoning 裁判理由
In the effective , the court held that: The disputes in this case focused on: (1) whether the encrypted data files in Eng format output by plaintiff Jingdiao Company's JDPaint were under the protection of computer software copyright; and (2) whether Naiky Company's act of developing software that could read the Eng files output by JDPaint was an act of “intentionally circumventing or undermining the technical measures taken by the copyright owner to protect its software copyright” as mentioned in item (6) of paragraph 1 of Article 48 of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the “Copyright Law”) and item (3) of paragraph 1 of Article 24 of the Regulation on the Protection of Computer Software

夫妻本是同林鸟

.
 法院生效裁判认为:本案应解决的争议焦点是:一、原告精雕公司的JDPaint软件输出的、采取加密措施的Eng格式数据文件,是否属于计算机软件著作权的保护范围;二、奈凯公司研发能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng格式文件的软件的行为,是否构成《中华人民共和国著作权法》(以下简称《著作权法》)第四十八条会让它误以为那是爱情第一款第六项、《计算机软件保护条例》第二十四条第一款第三项规定的“故意避开或者破坏著作权人为保护其软件著作权而采取的技术措施”的行为。
As for the first focal dispute, Article 2 of the Regulation on the Protection of Computer Software provided that: “For the purposes of this Regulation, “computer software” (hereinafter referred to as “software”) means computer programs and relevant documentation.” Article 3 thereof provided that: “For the purposes of this Regulation: (1) “Computer program” means a coded instruction sequence that may be executed by computers and other devices with information processing capabilities or a symbolic instruction sequence or symbolic statement sequence that may be automatically converted into a coded instruction sequence in order for a certain result. The source code program and target code program of a computer program shall be regarded as one work. (2) “Documentation” means written materials and diagrams which are used to describe the content, structure, design, functional specifications, historical development, testing results and usage of a program, such as program design instructions, flow charts, and user's manuals…” Article 4 thereof provided that: “Software protected under this Regulation must be software independently developed by the developer and already fixed in a material form.” In accordance with the aforesaid provisions, the protection of computer software copyright covered software programs and documentation. 关于第一点。《计算机软件保护条例》第二条规定:“本条例所称计算机软件(下称软件),是指计算机程序及其有关文档。”第三条规定:“本条例下列用语的含义:(一)计算机程序,是指为了得到某种结果而可以由计算机等具有信息处理能力的装置执行的代码化指令序列,或者可以被自动转换成代码化指令序列的符号化指令序列或者符号化语句序列。同一计算机程序的源程序和目标程序为同一作品。(二)文档,是指用来描述程序的内容、组成、设计、功能规格、开发情况、测试结果及使用方法的文字资料和图表等,如程序设计说明书、流程图、用户手册等……”第四条规定:“受本条例保护的软件必须由开发者独立开发,并已固定在某种有形物体上。”根据上述规定,计算机软件著作权的保护范围是软件程序和文档。
In this case, the Eng files were data files generated by JDPaint running on the processing and programming computer, and the output format, Eng, was the result from the execution of the target program of JDPaint on a computer. The Eng data files per se were not the coded instruction sequences, symbolic instruction sequences, or symbolic statement sequences, nor could they run or be executed on a computer. The act of deciphering Eng files would not directly cause any illegal duplication of JDPaint. In addition, data recorded in the Eng files were not inherent in JDPaint of plaintiff Jingdiao Company; instead, were generated after the software user entered engraving processing information. Such data were not owned by Jingdiao Company, the copyright owner of JDPaint. Therefore, neither data nor file format included in Eng data files was a component of JDPaint, and they were not under the protection of computer software copyright. 本案中,Eng文件是JDPaint软件在加工编程计算机上运行所生成的数据文件,其所使用的输出格式即Eng格式是计算机JDPaint软件的目标程序经计算机执行产生的结果。该格式数据文件本身不是代码化指令序列、符号化指令序列、符号化语句序列,也无法通过计算机运行和执行,对Eng格式文件的破解行为本身也不会直接造成对JDPaint软件的非法复制。此外,该文件所记录的数据并非原告精雕公司的JDPaint软件所固有,而是软件使用者输入雕刻加工信息而生成的,这些数据不属于JDPaint软件的著作权人精雕公司所有。因此,Eng格式数据文件中包含的数据和文件格式均不属于JDPaint软件的程序组成部分,不属于计算机软件著作权的保护范围。
As for the second focal dispute, in accordance with the provisions of item (6) of paragraph 1 of Article 48 of the Copyright Law and item (3) of paragraph 1 of Article 24 of the Regulation on the Protection of Computer Software, acts of intentionally circumventing or undermining the technical measures taken by the copyright owner to protect its software copyright were acts of infringement upon software copyright. The aforesaid provisions embodied restrictions on the intentional circumvention of technical measures, to protect copyright in computer software. However, the aforesaid restrictions on “intentional circumvention of technical measures” should not be abused. The aforesaid provisions mainly restricted acts of circumventing in bad faith the technical measures taken to protect software copyright. A copyright owner's acts of setting a specific file format for output data, taking encryption measures for the file format, and restricting machines of other brands from reading data saved in the file format so as to ensure that machines to which the copyright owner's computer software was tied enjoyed a competitive edge in the market were not acts of taking technical measures by the copyright owner to protect its software copyright within the meaning of the aforesaid provisions. Any other person's researching and developing software that could read files in a specific format set by the copyright owner did not constitute infringement upon software copyright. 关于第二点。根据《著作权法》四十八条第一款第六项、《计算机软件保护条例》第二十四条第一款第三项的规定,故意避开或者破坏著作权人为保护其软件著作权而采取的技术措施的行为,是侵犯软件著作权的行为。上述规定体现了对恶意规避技术措施的限制,是对计算机软件著作权的保护。但是,上述限制“恶意规避技术措施”的规定不能被滥用。上述规定主要限制的是针对受保护的软件著作权实施的恶意技术规避行为。著作权人为输出的数据设定特定文件格式,并对该文件格式采取加密措施,限制其他品牌的机器读取以该文件格式保存的数据,从而保证捆绑自己计算机软件的机器拥有市场竞争优势的行为,不属于上述规定所指的著作权人为保护其软件著作权而采取技术措施的行为。他人研发能够读取著作权人设定的特定文件格式的软件的行为,不构成对软件著作权的侵犯。
On the basis of the facts in this case, the Eng files output by JDPaint were files for completing data exchange between two computer programs in the “Jingdiao CNC engraving system” of Jingdiao Company. In terms of the design purpose, Jingdiao Company adopted the Eng format, rather than a general format, to complete data exchange not for the encrypted protection of JDPaint, but hoping that only the “Jingdiao CNC engraving system” could receive Eng files and only the engraving machines to which the “Jingdiao CNC engraving system” was tied could use the software. Jingdiao Company adopted the Eng format for the output files of JDPaint, so that JDPaint could only be used in the “Jingdiao CNC engraving system.” The fundamental purpose and true intention of Jingdiao Company were to establish and consolidate the tie-in sales relationship between JDPaint software and its engraving machines. Such acts of Jingdiao Company were not taking technical measures to protect software copyright. If the protection of software copyright was expanded to products to which the software was tied, it would necessarily exceed the extent of copyright protection of computer software as prescribed in the Copyright Law. The technical measures taken by Jingdiao Company in this case were not taken to protect its copyright in JDPaint, but to seek benefits beyond copyright. Therefore, the technical measures taken by Jingdiao Company were not technical measures taken by the copyright owner to protect its software copyright as prescribed in the Copyright Law and the Regulation on the Protection of Computer Software, and Naiky Company's acts of developing software capable of reading Eng files output by JDPaint were not acts of intentionally circumventing and undermining the technical measures taken by the copyright owner to protect its software copyright. 根据本案事实,JDPaint输出的Eng格式文件是在精雕公司的“精雕CNC雕刻系统”中两个计算机程序间完成数据交换的文件。从设计目的而言,精雕公司采用Eng格式而没有采用通用格式完成数据交换,并不在于对JDPaint软件进行加密保护,而是希望只有“精雕CNC雕刻系统”能接收此种格式,只有与“精雕CNC雕刻系统”相捆绑的雕刻机床才可以使用该软件。精雕公司对JDPaint输出文件采用Eng格式,旨在限定JDPaint软件只能在“精雕CNC雕刻系统”中使用,其根本目的和真实意图在于建立和巩固JDPaint软件与其雕刻机床之间的捆绑关系。这种行为不属于为保护软件著作权而采取的技术保护措施。如果将对软件著作权的保护扩展到与软件捆绑在一起的产品上,必然超出我国著作权法对计算机软件著作权的保护范围。精雕公司在本案中采取的技术措施,不是为保护JDPaint软件著作权而采取的技术措施,而是为获取著作权利益之外利益而采取的技术措施。因此,精雕公司采取的技术措施不属于《著作权法》计算机软件保护条例》所规定著作权人为保护其软件著作权而采取的技术措施,奈凯公司开发能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng格式文件的软件的行为,并不属于故意避开和破坏著作权人为保护软件著作权而采取的技术措施的行为。
fnl_4438304 
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese