Using Online Platform To Sell Fake Evidence Is Difficult To Pretend To Be A Brand Name Involving 300 Million Yuan.

Yesterday, the Supreme People's Procuratorate issued ten typical cases of intellectual property protection in 2015, involving

There are 4 cases, two cases of infringement of commercial secrets and copyright infringement, and the remaining two cases involve trademark and patent rights.

According to reports, in 2015, the procuratorial organs resolutely cracked down on counterfeiting registered trademarks, infringing trade secrets and other intellectual property crimes, and prosecuted 8664 people.

Intellectual property cases often involve professional fields and are professional. Publishing typical cases set up a ruler for handling such cases.

Making use of the network platform to sell and collect evidence is difficult.

Bring convenience to people, but also bring trouble. The goods are difficult to distinguish between true and false. Many illegal elements sell fake products to all parts of the country through well-known network sales platform, with many victims and great difficulty in obtaining evidence.

In September 2011, defendants Luo Lixin, Bai Gaoyuan and Ding Wei jointly established the Xiamen Marco commerce company, which is responsible for sales by Luo Lixin, and responsible for financial affairs of Bai Gao Yuan. Ding Wei is responsible for the purchase and sale of fake products.

Sports shoes.

From January 2012 to September 2013, in order to obtain illegal profits, the company bought the knowingly counterfeit Nike sports shoes and sold them to "famous shoe store", "vip.com" and other businesses. The total sales amount amounted to 3000 million yuan.

In October 2013, the people's Procuratorate of Siming District of Xiamen, Fujian Province approved the arrest of 3 people.

In August 2014, Siming procuratorate filed a public prosecution against Marx, Luo Lixin, Bai Gaoyuan and Ding Wei.

In January 2015, the people's Court of Xiamen Siming District sentenced the company to a fine of 10 million yuan for selling counterfeit registered trademarks, and sentenced Luo Lixin, Bai Gaoyuan and Ding Wei to 5 years and 6 months for the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks and fined 2 million yuan.

The amount involved in the case is as high as 4000 yuan. In the course of handling the case, the procuratorial organ seriously combed the evidence from the mass evidence, focused on analyzing the subjective criminal intent of each criminal suspect, and clarified their respective guilt.

In view of the difficulty of obtaining evidence from cyber crime, detailed list of evidence collection and supplementary investigation outline are set up to guide investigation organs to collect and fix evidences in a comprehensive way, and require investigation organs to carry out special judicial audit, accurately identify the amount involved, and lay a solid evidence basis for later conviction and punishment of companies involved and related personnel.

The procuratorial organs have cracked down on such criminal acts of infringing intellectual property rights by Internet, which purifies the network consumption environment and provides a strong legal guarantee for protecting consumers' legitimate rights and interests.

The amount of money involved in counterfeit brand name is 300 million yuan.

The typical case of this release is that the amount involved is as high as 3 billion yuan. The criminal gang has a strict organizational system, a clear division of labor, a long selling time, a concealment of selling means, and a variety of means to evade investigation.

From July 2006 to November 2014, defendant Li Ruguo, as the actual controller of Shanghai Hancheng business management company (also known as "Taobao city"), took advantage of its control status in the "Taobao city" to provide premises for indulgence and shelter merchants to sell for a long time during the rental and day-to-day management of Taobao City, and to collect more than 90 yuan from the shops.

As a matter of fact, between November 2010 and May 2013, a total of 33 merchants were sentenced to guilty of crimes of selling counterfeit registered trademarks, and the total amount of cases involved in the sale of Taobao city shops was 3 billion yuan.

The products of the world-famous registered trademarks such as counterfeit "LV", "GUCCI", "CHANEL", "DIOR" and "PRADA" seized by the public security organs are worth more than 1.6 billion yuan.

In 2015, 17 defendants in the case were pferred to the Jingan District people's Procuratorate of Shanghai for examination and prosecution.

At present, the people's Court of Putuo District, Shanghai, with the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks, has sentenced 11 defendants to 3 to 4 months' imprisonment, 3 months' detention and 3 months' probation, ranging from 80 thousand yuan to 3000 yuan.

In order to ensure the quality and effectiveness of the case, investigators in the procuratorate promptly intervened in the investigation, aiming at the interweaving of criminal acts, the mutual concealment of persons involved in the case and the collusion of dens, and so on, and put forward suggestions for further investigation to the investigation organs by further fixing the confession of the involved persons and the auditing and appraisal of the involved cases.

In order to verify the details of the crime of selling counterfeit goods, the investigators went to the "Taobao city" to investigate the shop premises, store layout, the location of the hidden store, and the concealment of the goods, and fixed the evidence through pcripts, photographs, etc., to consolidate the defendant's key evidence of knowing the intention of selling the goods intentionally.

{page_break}

Business secrets were deductible 500 thousand

Business secret is the property right of an enterprise, which is related to the core competitiveness of an enterprise. It is of vital importance to the development of an enterprise, and some of them even directly affect the survival of an enterprise.

From 2009 to 2013, as a member of R & D team, Song Bin participated in the research and development of tryptophan production technology by Meihua biotechnology group, and signed a confidentiality agreement.

During his work, Song Bin privately copied an electronic version of the trial production of tryptophan extraction process and stored it in his notebook computer.

After Song Bin resigned in 2013, he posted the internet name "plum blossom" on the Internet "fermentation man forum" to announce the technical scheme of tryptophan extraction.

It has been identified that the technology of tryptophan extraction from plum blossom is not known to the public. It is the commercial secret of plum blossom company. The information disclosed by Song Bin is essentially the same as the related information in the summary of the trial production of tryptophan extraction process from plum blossom company.

Audited, the research and development cost of tryptophan production technology of plum blossom company is more than 1600 yuan.

Song Bin's crime of Infringing Commercial Secrets was pferred to the Langfang people's Procuratorate for examination and prosecution in May 28, 2015 by the end of the investigation of the Langfang Public Security Bureau of Hebei province.

The people's Procuratorate of the Langfang economic and Technological Development Zone filed a lawsuit against the court on 3 July 2015.

In September 7th of the same year, the people's Court of the Langfang economic and Technological Development Zone sentenced Song Bin, the defendant, to 5 years' imprisonment and fined 500 thousand yuan for violating trade secrets.

With the development of China's economy, the cases of infringing trade secrets have shown many trends, especially the advent of the Internet era, which objectively provides convenient conditions for criminals to disclose and quickly disseminate trade secrets.

In the accusation of crimes, the procuratorial organ emphatically analyzes and demonstrates the confidentiality obligations of the perpetrator and the amount of the loss of the obligee. It points out that the "significant loss" caused by the infringement of trade secrets should be comprehensively determined according to the cost of R & D, the benefits of implementing the business secrets, the available interests and the time of maintaining the competitive advantage, and finally the court's decision support.

The investigation of this case has solved the difficulties of similar cases in practice, and helped to guide the obligee to take further measures to strengthen the protection of trade secrets, and also effectively deterred the crime of infringing commercial secrets.