China'S 10000 Tons Low And Medium Grade Industrial Yarn Production Line Put Into Operation

A total investment of 350 million yuan in China

Tire cord cloth Co., Ltd. is an internationally influential nylon 66 industrial yarn manufacturer, producing more than 10 tons of industrial wire and cord fabric annually.

It is reported that the middle and low denier silk project has complete independent intellectual property rights, and the product quality is up to

Supplement:

Batik is an ancient folk textile printing and dyeing technology in China. It is very popular among ethnic minorities in Southwest China.

Recently, a lawsuit around the batik pattern was opened in Beijing.

Hong Fuyuan, President of the batik dyeing Association of Anshun, Guizhou, took the head of a wax printing and clothing handicraft shop in Beijing, Chen Mou, and the Beijing Miao culture and Arts Exchange Center, which was run by two people, to the court. He thought the other party used his batik pattern, violated his right to work, and claimed 100 thousand yuan.

The reporter was informed that the court eventually sentenced three defendants, such as Qing, to stop selling and using infringing works immediately, making an apology and making a compensation of 70 thousand yuan.

This batik picture right case involves 13 works: "Shuanglong Shou Shou", "tile dragon pattern tablecloth", "Dunhuang Ji le", "painted pottery", "frame inspection tour mural" and "Taishan Shi Dang".

Hong Fuyuan called it the master of wax printing industry in China. His works were awarded many times at home and abroad. Over 30 years, thousands of batik patterns including 13 works have been created.

He found that the defendant, qingmou and others, without permission, used the patterns mentioned above to produce batik products without authorization, and published the above infringing product patterns on his website to promote sales.

Hong Fuyuan asked the court to order: 1 and three defendants apologized to themselves in the publication of the "Zhong Qian Zaobao" plate, and 2 and three defendants stopped using 13 works of their own rights, and stopped selling the infringing batik products involved in the case, stopped publishing photos of infringing batik products on the website, and 3 and three defendants jointly and severally compensated for their own economic losses 100 thousand yuan; 4, the litigation costs of the case were borne by the three defendants.

The court held that Hong Fuyuan submitted the registration certificate, the original design manuscript, the batik product containing the design pattern and the legitimate publications, and should be deemed to be the creator of the batik product design plan in accordance with the law in the case of no evidence in the case of Hong Fuyuan.

Qing Mou, Chen Mou and Miao Yi art center, without Hong Fuyuan's permission, produce and sell the batik products which are basically identical to those of Hong Fuyuan in the batik work with the right to do so, and publish them on their website. They neither signed Hong Fuyuan nor paid any remuneration to Hong Fuyuan. His behavior violated the rights of authorship, duplication and remuneration of batik works in Hong Fuyuan, and he should bear the legal responsibilities of stopping infringement, apology, and compensation for losses.

Qing Mou, Chen Mou and Miao culture center advocate that they are sellers of the batik products and have legitimate sources, but they do not provide sufficient evidence to corroborate them, and the court will not support them.