Beijing Jingdiao Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Naiky Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.(Case of Dispute over Infringement upon Copyright)@#

Judgment abstract:
According to Article 24, Paragraph 1, Item 3 of the Regulation on the Protection of Computer Software, knowingly circumventing or sabotaging technological measures used by the copyright owner for protecting the software copyright is infringement upon software copyright. This provision is to restrict malicious technical circumvention to protect computer software copyright. A copyright owner can use technical measures to protect the software copyright in accordance with laws and regulations to safeguard his legitimate rights and interests. Knowingly circumventing or sabotaging the said technical measures infringes upon the software copyright and shall be liable for corresponding damages.@#
However,the above mentioned provision shall not be abused. This provision is mainly against the malicious technical circumvention with regard to legally protected software copyright. It is not the use of technical measures to protect the software copyright described above that a copyright owner sets up a special file format for output data and encrypts the file format to prevent other brand equipments from reading the data saved in that file format, in order to ensure the competitive edge of the equipment bundled with its computer software. Where the copyright owner claims that the defendant infringes on the software copyright by developing software to decrypt the specific file format set up by the copyright owner and shall be liable for corresponding damages, the people's court shall not support such a claim.@#
BASIC FACTS

Plaintiff: Beijing Jingdiao Co., Ltd., located at Shilong Industrial Park of Mentougou District, Beijing.@#
Legal Representative: Wei Fei, general manager of the company.@#
Defendant: Shanghai Naiky Electronic Technology Co., Ltd., located at Liyue Road of Minxing District, Shanghai.@#
Legal Representative: Wang Yongsheng, president of the company.@#
PROCEDURAL POSTURE@#
For the dispute over infringement upon compute software copyright, Beijing Jingdiao Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jingdiao Company) filed a lawsuit with the No.1 Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai Municipality against Shanghai Naiky Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Naiky Company).@#
The plaintiff claimed that: the plaintiff independently developed the CNC carving system, which is composed of three major parts, namely, CAD/CAM software (JDPaint), numerical control system of carving, and mechanical body. This system shall be used through two computers, one is for processing and programming, and the other is for numerical control. These two computers need to exchange data to run two different programs, which means that the programs need to be run through data files. More specifically: JDPaint generates data files of Eng format after it is run by the processing and programming computer, and the data files are received by the control software run by the numerical control computer and changed into processing commands. The plaintiff owns copyright over JDPaint, which is not sold on the market but only used on the numerical control carving machine independently produced by the plaintiff. At the beginning of 2006, the plaintiff found out that the defendant gave great publicity to the fact that the NC-1000 carving and milling machine control system developed by it fully supports all versions of Eng files on its website. The Ncstudio software in the control system can read the Eng data files outputted by JDPaint, and the plaintiff has enciphered the Eng data files. The defendant's act of deciphering the Eng data files as well as developing and distributing the numerical control system which can read the Eng data files is an act intentionally avoiding or breaching the technical measure taken by the plaintiff for protecting its software copyright and infringes upon the plaintiff's software copyright. The defendant's acts make it possible for other numerical control carving machines to illegally receive Eng files and cause the decrease of the sales volume of the plaintiff's precisely carving machine thus cause economic losses to the plaintiff. So the plaintiff requests the court to order the defendant to immediately stop developing and distributing the numerical control system which supports all versions of Eng files outputted by JDPaint as well as other such infringing acts, to make a public apology to the plaintiff on a non-ad page (other than gutter) of Xinmin Evening News of Shanghai and Strait City Daily of Fuzhou, and to make compensation for the economic losses of 485,000 yuan as suffered by the plaintiff from the defendant's infringing act.@#
．．．．．．

北京精雕科技有限公司诉上海奈凯电子科技有限公司著作权侵权纠纷案@#
【裁判摘要】
根据《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技术规避的限制，对计算机软件著作权的保护。著作权人可以依法采取保护其软件著作权的技术措施，维护自己的合法权益。行为人故意避开或者破坏上述技术措施的，构成对软件著作权的侵犯，依法应当承担相应的法律责任。@#
但是，上述法律规定不能被滥用。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的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。著作权人以他人研发软件读取其设定的特定文件格式构成对其软件著作权的侵犯，主张他人承担相应法律责任的，人民法院依法不予支持。@#
原告：北京精雕科技有限公司。住所地：北京市门头沟区石龙工业区。@#
法定代表人：蔚飞，该公司总经理。@#
被告：上海奈凯电子科技有限公司。住所地：上海市闵行区立跃路。@#
法定代表人：汪永生，该公司董事长。@#
@#
原告北京精雕科技有限公司(以下简称精雕公司)因与被告上海奈凯电子科技有限公司(以下简称奈凯公司)发生计算机软件著作权侵权纠纷，向上海市第一中级人民法院提起诉讼。@#
原告精雕公司诉称：原告自主开发了精雕CNC雕刻系统，该系统由三大部分组成，即精雕雕刻CAD／CAM软件(JDPaint软件)、精雕数控系统、机械本体三大部分。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，判令被告在上海《新民晚报》和福州《海峡都市报》中缝以外非广告版面向原告公开赔礼道歉，并赔偿原告因被告侵权行为所遭受的经济损失人民币 485 000元。@#
原告精雕公司提交以下证据：@#
1．北京市门头沟区公证处出具的公证书一份。主要内容是：被告奈凯公司在其网址www．weihong．com．cn宣传奈凯推出的 NC-1000雕铣机控制系统，称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。用以证明被告该数控系统中的Ncstudio软件能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng格式数据文件。@#
2．原告自制的资产负债表、损益表、产品材料消耗表、成本表以及6份原告分公司出具的报告。用以证明原告精雕雕刻机的销售量减少，被告的行为给原告造成了实际经济损失。@#
被告奈凯公司辩称：被告开发的Ncstudio软件是机械工业的控制软件，于 2001年12月6日进行了著作权登记。原告精雕公司享有著作权的JDPaint软件是工艺美术制造业的图形软件。两者在界面、功能设置、应用环境等方面均完全不同。 Ncstudio软件能够读取JDPaint软件输出的Eng格式数据文件属实，但因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。@#
被告奈凯公司提交以下证据：原告精雕公司的计算机软件著作权登记公告及JDPaint精雕雕刻软件详细信息。 JDPaintV5．0平面设计使用说明书，En3d6操作使用说明书，含原告JDPaintV5．0、 En3d6软件、被告Ncstudio软件界面及使用说明书的光盘和部分打印件。用以证明原告的JDPaint软件与被告的Ncstudio在界面、功能设置、应用环境等方面存在较大区别。@#
上海市第一中级人民法院依法组织了质证。质证中，被告奈凯公司认为原告精雕公司提供的证据材料均系原告单方自制，对其证据的真实性有异议；原告对被告提供的证据材料的真实性不持异议。法院认为，原告提供的证据1合法真实，与本案有关联性，应予确认；原告提供的证据2系原告自行制作，被告未予认可，故不予确认。被告提供的证据材料合法真实，与本案有关联性，故予以确认。@#
上海市第一中级人民法院一审查明：@#
2001年10月16日，中华人民共和国国家版权局(以下简称国家版权局)向原告精雕公司颁发软著登字第0011393号《计算机软件著作权登记证书》，登记号为 2001SR4460，软件名称为JDPaint精雕雕刻软件V4．0(简称：JDPaint)。该证书推定原告自2001年7月16日起，在法定的期限内享有上述软件的著作权。@#
2004年7月9日，国家版权局向原告精雕公司颁发软著登字第025028号《计算机软件著作权登记证书》，登记号为 2004SR06627，软件名称为精雕雕刻软件 JDPaintV5．0(简称：JDPaint)。该证书载明：权利取得方式：原始取得；权利范围：全部权利；首次发表日期：2003年3月1日。@#
2004年5月21日，国家版权局向被告奈凯公司颁发软著登字第023060号《计算机软件著作权登记证书》，登记号为 2004SR04659，软件名称为奈凯数控系统 V5．0(简称：Ncstudio)。该证书载明：权利取得方式：原始取得；权利范围：全部权利；首次发表日期：2004年3月29日。@#
．．．．．．