The Future Of Technology

    Navigation in hand, I have the world. With the development of the Internet and the popularization of mobile phones, navigation electronic maps have become the standard for most people to travel. Based on functions such as positioning display, path calculation, and guidance, electronic maps have broad application scenarios in the Internet of Vehicles, autonomous driving, and location big data industries, and have become a basic strategic resource in current business competition.

    So, does a navigation electronic map constitute a map work and is protected by Chinese law? On December 3, 2020, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court publicly pronounced a second-instance verdict on an electronic map copyright infringement and unfair competition dispute, ruling to revoke the first-instance verdict and award more than 10 million yuan in damages.

    Judgment of the first instance: Navigation electronic maps are not protected by the Copyright Law

    According to reports, the appellant in this case is NavInfo Company, and the appellees are Qihoo Company, Xiuyou Company, and Lide Company. NavInfo claimed in the first trial that it signed a "Cooperation Agreement" with Xiuyou to jointly build location services and related products, stipulating that NavInfo would provide the maps and related data required by Xiuyou, which Xiuyou could use for It has its own website, App online and offline map applications, and stipulates that without the written consent of NavInfo, Xiuyou Company shall not forward or resell NavInfo's data products in any form without authorization.

    However, during the performance of the contract, Xiuyou Company exceeded the "Cooperation Agreement" and provided Qihoo Company with the electronic map involved in the case; Qihoo Company provided the above-mentioned electronic map obtained from Xiuyou Company to Qihoo Company without permission. On the 360 website and App operated, users can use the related services of the electronic map involved in the navigation of the case; Lide Company obtained the electronic map involved in the case from Xiuyou Company, and sent the relevant website map to the Bureau of Surveying and Mapping for review without permission. As such, these three companies constitute infringement.

    Moreover, the three companies all claimed that the electronic map data used by Qihoo came from NavInfo and had been legally authorized. NavInfo requested the court to order the three companies to compensate 100 million yuan for economic losses and 1 million yuan for reasonable expenses on the grounds that these three companies carried out false propaganda, infringed the legitimate rights and interests and potential business opportunities of NavInfo, and constituted unfair competition. Yuan et al.

In the judgment of the first instance, the court held that the navigation electronic map involved in the case did not constitute a map work stipulated by the Copyright Law of my country, so the judgment rejected all the claims of NavInfo.

    NavInfo expressed dissatisfaction with this, and then appealed to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, requesting that the first-instance judgment be revoked and the judgment changed in favor of NavInfo's claim.

    Second-instance judgment: the first-instance judgment was revoked, and the third company was commuted to pay compensation.

    The second-instance judgment of the Beijing Intellectual Property Court revoked the first-instance judgment, and the three companies, Qihoo Company, Xiuyou Company, and Lide Company, jointly and severally compensate NavInfo for economic losses of 10 million yuan and reasonable expenses of 500,000 yuan. What is the legal basis for the Beijing Intellectual Property Court's decision?

    "Based on the basic provisions of the "Copyright Law", we reviewed the elements of the map work in the graphic work, and found that the navigation electronic map claimed by the plaintiff in the case has the " The originality of the Copyright Law (in the sense) is in line with the characteristics of map works in graphic works, and belongs to the works protected by the Copyright Law." Feng Gang, a judge of the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, pointed out in an interview with a reporter from Science and Technology Daily recently. .

The ability to collect and process massive geographic information and the accuracy of cartographic expression are the originality and market value of electronic maps, as well as the key to the commercial competition of electronic map makers. At the same time, the storage and dissemination methods of electronic maps make it easier for rights holders to infringe intellectual property rights by copying, imitating, etc. It can be seen from this case that with the rapid development of science and technology, people's awareness of the object of intellectual property protection needs to be continuously improved in judicial practice.