《沃顿知识产权在线》是沃顿商学院旗下的经济商业评论刊物。"沃顿知识在线"在美国享有很高的声誉和评价，在全球有近100万名注册读者。中文版在2年前在上海推出。2007年4月26日，上海得勤律师事务所商建刚律师应邀接受了《沃顿知识产权在线》的记者采访，以下是采访全文：

Intellectual Property Rights Protection for E-commerce in China: A Work in Progress

Zhou Xuan, a young professional and working mother, discovered last year the wonderful world of Taobao.com, the largest c-c online trading website in China. What she liked best were children’s clothes and shoes meant for exports to the European and American markets. These types of merchandise, with their creative designs and high quality, are not available in China’s department stores. But one can get them at Taobao at great discounts in Western markets. Transactions are easy, safe, and enjoyable.  Zhou decided to set up a store on Taobao herself. She works for a state-owned enterprise (SOE) and has plenty of time on her hands, although she does have to do manage her venture in secret.

Her store, “Aquarian Princess and Magic Wardrobe,” named after Zhou and her daughter’s sign, was opened in October 2006. Zhou went to a wholesale market to carefully pick children’s clothes and shoes. She wanted only “the real stuff” – extras from the original overseas orders of branded merchandize. A month after her online store was up and running, she completed her first sale. Now the store has been operating for seven months and Zhou is pleased with her admittedly moderate sales. Her vision is to have a stable supply of quality merchandise and a regular group of buyers. She even dreams of working on her store full-time when sales reach a certain scale, and perhaps opening a brick-and-mortar store one day.

Zhou doesn’t realize that she might have infringed on the trademarks or copyrights of overseas brand owners. Her story is a recurrent theme on e-commerce platforms in China. More and more Chinese, especially net-savvy young people, are joining the swelling ranks of buyers and sellers online, which explains the staggering growth of online trading in China.

Booming E-commerce and Rampant IPR Infringement

According to the atest figures released by Taobao itself, the online giant now has 35.1million registered members and sells over 60 million pieces of merchandise. In fact, Taobao’s transaction values in 2006 already exceeded RMB16.9 billion (US$2.1 billion), overtaking Lotus (RMB10billion,US$1.25billion ) and Wal-Mart (RMB9,93 billion,US$1.24billion ) in China.

According to Taobao, in the first quarter of 2007, daily transactions were close to RMB100million and total Q1 transaction exceeded RMB7billion. There were 100,000 sellers with monthly profits over RMB2,000. Sun Tongyu, president of Taobao, estimated that by 2009, Taobao would support RMB 100 billion (US$12.5 billion）-worth transactions and create one million jobs in China.

Jack Ma, founder and CEO of Alibaba, is pleased that his company sells things “as big as cars, machines and houses, and as small as cosmetics and pens … Whether you are a giant like Lenovo, or a storefront of just several people, whether you are a female PhD in Beijing or an unemployed youth in Zhengzhou a city in the middle of China, you can sell things and make money on our website,” he told the Economist.

But as e-commerce grows to be a major force in retailing, the legitimacy question has inevitably arisen and scrutiny has intensified. Online members sell numerous branded merchandises online. Some, if not most of them, have obviously not been authorized by brand owners. “Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) infringement in e-commerce is still rampant today”, Shang Jiangang, partner and attorney-at-law of Shanghai Diligence Law Firm, an IPR specialist, told China Knowledge@Wharton. “Every style of IPR infringement offline is also reflected in the online space,” added Spring Liu, attorney-at-law with Guangsheng & Partners (G&P), a law firm based in Beijing.

A few high-profile lawsuits involving IPR infringement in e-commerce seem to echo this judgment. Last year, Nike sued “King of Ball Game in a Century,” an online store on e-Bay China operated by a former professional sportsman in Shanghai. The store owner, Zhuang, spent RMB90,000 to buy 1,069 fake Nike shoes from a couple of wholesalers in Fujian province, south of China, and sold them on e-Bay. Nike asked for RMB200,000 in compensation. Under court mediation, the two parties settled and Zhuang eventually paid Nike RMB60,000 in compensation. Huangpu District Court in Shanghai further sentenced Zhuang to nine months in imprisonment (which was later suspended.) 

In 2006, a Danish company, owner of branded clothes ONLY, VERO MODA and JACK＆JONES, sued e-Bay China directly. The plaintiff claimed that there were as many as 73 stores on e-Bay selling unauthorized ONLY, VERO MODA and JACK＆JONES merchandise at great discounts off prices at authorized counters, and asked for RMB200,000 compensation. This time, Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court didn’t support the plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that e-Bay as a platform didn’t infringe on the plaintiff’s trademarks itself, and that e-Bay was unable to control the tremendous amount of information on its site.

What Role E-commerce Platforms Should Play

Have online platforms such as Taobao and e-Bay done enough to provide IPR protection? Lu Weixing, public relations manager of Taobao’s Strategic Marketing Center, responded by saying that “Taobao fully conforms to Chinese laws and regulations.” He added that if “brand owners lodge a complaint, we deal with it promptly. We take off the concerned merchandises and even shut down the stores.” Lu said that “Taobao has already worked with brand owners such as Shiseido, Nike and Adidas to tackle these issues together. These brand owners even opened retail fronts themselves directly on Taobao. They employ defensive as well as offensive measures.”

Liu from G&P suggested that companies borrow the “Safe Goalkeeper’s Principle”, which has proven quite effective with search engines. It works as follows: An IPR claimant reports an infringer website to a search engine. If the search engine has adequate reason to believe there is indeed infringement, it is obliged to delete the website. Otherwise, the search engine announces it on its site and leaves the claimant and the accused party to resolve the issue among themselves. Liu thinks it can work with e-commerce as well.

But Shang from Shanghai Diligence law firm suggested that online platforms should and could actually do even more. For example, a declaration system can be effective, said Shang. Online platforms can track online stores over a certain amount of transaction values. Secondly, top brands should be given priorities in IP rights protection.

On April 19th 2007, the Shanghai Administration of Industry and Commerce issued a second order banning the sales of 20 top labels in small markets, including Giorgio Armani, Versace, Burberry, the North Face, Ermenegildo Zegna, Omega and Rolex. The first order, issued in October 2004, banned the sale of 40 labels in small markets,. But there is no indication that online platforms such as Taobao and e-Bay are prepared to apply such stringent methods at this stage.

Shang acknowledged the issue of high costs in policing and cracking down on online IP rights infringement. As the secretary general of IP Rights Centre of National Animation Industry Development Base, he is now working on a program to develop an accreditation system of online stores for e-commerce platforms. “Taking legal action towards IPR infringement can be very costly with little effect. Our thinking is to set up a third-party system offering accreditation service to online platforms, and to help the latter to take the initiative to recognize brands and actively screen stores in advance before infringement can actually happen.”

China’s Legislation and Enforcement

“First, you should note that IP rights infringement is not worse online than offline,” said Shang, “In fact, a lot of times, online shops are more trustworthy due to the credit system. You go to second-tier, third-tier cities in China, and sometimes you dare not buy things even in downtown department stores. What about those roadside stalls? Aren’t they all selling fakes?”

“IP rights protection online in China is getting better every year,” added Liu, “To put it in our terms, there are fewer and fewer high-quality, lawsuit-worthy subjects (i.e., big infringers) these days, indicating much improved legislation and law enforcement.”

Liu explained that China’s online IP rights protection legislation is, in fact, up to international standards, and the government devotes a lot of efforts to enforcement, arguably under international pressure, although he acknowledged that efforts vary in different regions. In Shanghai, enforcement is fast and efficient. “For example, if an offense is reported in the afternoon, the Shanghai police can take action on the same evening,” said Liu. On April 20th, 2007, Shanghai had an IPR Week in Zhangjiang High-Tech Park publicizing Shanghai’s achievements in IPR protection and promoting IPR knowledge to the general public.

In June 2006, the Ministry of Commerce issued “Guidance from the MOC on Online Transactions – A Draft for Soliciting Opinions” on its website. The MOC is contemplating requesting online sellers to register with the Administration of Industry and Commerce. Once registered, a seller will be legally accountable when selling products infringing on IP rights. The draft sent a shock wave among sellers, whose online businesses would be greatly affected. It is unclear when the draft will be finalized and take effect, or how stringent it will be. 

Liu commented that unlike in the West, China has a complex legal system. “Westerners know only about laws passed by the People’s Congress,” said Liu, “In fact, the legal interpretations issued by the Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate, various administrative rules and regulations by central government’s ministries, and local laws and regulations can also be applied in legal proceedings.” 

China’s complex structure of law-enforcement authorities responsible for IP rights protection doesn’t help. The Press and Publication Administration and Copyright Bureau are actually one organization with two names, responsible for copyrights. Then one might also have to deal with the Trademark Bureau (trademarks), IP Rights Bureau (patents), Law-Enforcement Unit of the Ministry of Culture (video and audio products) and the General Administration of Industry and Commerce (trade secrete and unfair competition). Uninitiated IP rights owners and their lawyers can easily get lost in this labyrinth, not to mention the escalating costs involved.  

“Some Western companies lost an IP rights case in China and complained about China’s legal environment,” added Liu. “In fact, their complaints might not be made on the right grounds. I talked with judges. Sometimes we think plaintiffs and their lawyers approach the cases with the wrong strategy and mindset because they are not familiar with China’s legal system.”

New Challenges

Some seeming infringements might not necessarily warrant legal actions. For example, if Zhou and similar stores sell extras of overseas orders without using the trademarks of brand owners, or if the trademarks have not been registered in China, the sellers will not be deemed to have infringed on trademarks in a legal sense. (They might have infringed on copyright, said Liu.) Then there is the threshold issue. Many online stores specializing in extras of overseas orders sell just one piece or a few pieces of an item. The transaction volumes and values are so small that they cannot trigger criminal charges. Spring Liu gave us an example in which an online infringer was caught and sued, but the overseas brand owners didn’t even respond to the request of the Chinese court to appear as witnesses.

However, according to Liu, there are still numerous challenges regarding IP rights protection, mainly with enforcement. He pointed out that in many underdeveloped regions in China, especially remote cities and counties, law enforcement authorities don’t even understand their online IP rights protection obligations very well. (Liu noted that the Chinese government is organizing training sessions for them.)

Moreover, infringement is getting more and more complex online, according to Liu. He gave an example involving online gaming. “Servers were placed in remote regions and even overseas, making it difficult for police to trace. And IP addresses can be virtual, making it difficult to catch the infringers.” A report in Business Week recently quoted a member of the QBPC (The Quality Brands Protection Committee, a coalition of foreign and domestic companies seeking IP rights protection): "The bad guys develop skills much faster than law enforcement, so while there are stronger and stronger efforts, the collaboration is lagging behind the counterfeiters." It’s believed by the author that IP rights infringement is a global problem and targeting China alone is not sufficient.

“The costs of cracking down on IP rights violation can be exorbitant,” commented Shang. “That’s why we are advocating a system for retailers to take initiatives to prevent infringement both online and offline.”

Published : 2007.04.24

(中文译本)

周璇是个年轻的职业女性，去年她在淘宝网上发现了奇妙世界，这是中国最大的消费者对消费者（c-c）网上交易站点。她最感兴趣的是外销到欧洲和美国市场的童装和童鞋。这些设计精良，质量颇佳的商品并不在中国的百货公司上架，但却能以低于西方市场零售价很多的折扣在淘宝网上买到。交易过程简单、安全、愉快。最终，周决定在淘宝网上自己开店。她在一家国营企业工作，时间充裕，但她还是要在私下里做这件事。

她的店铺于2006年10月开张，名为“水瓶公主 魔衣橱”，以她和她女儿的星座命名。周去批发市场精挑细选童装和童鞋，她只要那些外销的原单品牌货。店铺在网上运营一个月后，周做成了第一笔交易。如今，这家店铺已经经营了7个月，周对销售额感到很满意，她的愿望是拥有一个稳定的高质量商品供应源和一个固定的顾客群。她甚至期望当销售额达到一定程度时，能够全职经营她的店铺，也许有一天还能开一家实体店。

周并未意识到，她可能侵犯了海外品牌所有者的商标权或版权。她的经历在中国电子商务平台上屡见不鲜。越来越多的中国人，尤其是精通网络的年轻人，正不断加入飞速扩张的网上买卖群体，而这正是方兴未艾的中国网上交易的最佳说明。

繁荣的电子商务和猖獗的知识产权侵犯

据淘宝网最新数据显示，目前该网站共有3510万注册用户，经销6000多万件商品。事实上，淘宝网2006年的成交额已经超过169亿人民币，超过了易初莲花公司（100亿人民币）和沃玛特（99.3亿人民币）的在华销售额。

据淘宝称，2007年第一季度其日成交额近亿元，一季度成交总额突破了70亿人民币。有10万商家月收入超过2000元。淘宝总裁孙彤宇预计，到2009年，淘宝有望实现1000亿的成交额，并为中国创造100万个就业机会。

电子商务公司的野心无可限量。阿里巴巴的创始人兼CEO马云曾自豪的对《经济学人》杂志说，他公司卖的东西“大到汽车、机器和房子，小到化妆品和钢笔”，“不论你是像联想一样的商业巨头，还是仅有几名员工的小店，不管你是北京的女博士，还是郑州（中国中原地区的一个城市）的失业青年，都可以通过我们的网站卖东西赚钱。”

但随着电子商务逐渐成长为零售业的主力军，其合法性问题便不可避免的产生，与此同时，监察力度也加强了。注册会员在网上销售各种品牌货，其中一些并未经品牌持有者授权。上海得勤律师事务所合伙人、律师、知识产权专家商建刚跟中国沃顿知识在线谈到，“现在，电子商务中侵犯知识产权的行为依旧猖獗。”北京广盛律师事务所的刘春泉律师补充说：“网下交易中各种知识产权侵犯形式在网上也都一一显现。”

一些牵涉电子商务中侵犯知识产权的高难诉讼恰恰印证了上述判断。去年，耐克公司控告一家名为“世纪球王” 的店铺，这家店由上海的一名前职业运动员在易趣网上开办。店主庄某花了9万元人民币从福建的一些批发商那里买了1069双假冒耐克鞋，并在易趣上叫卖。耐克为此向其索赔20万人民币。经法庭调解，双方达成协议，庄某赔偿耐克公司人民币6万元。上海黄浦区法院追加判处庄某有期徒刑9个月，缓刑9个月执行。

2006年，旗下拥有ONLY，VERO MODA以及JACK＆JONES等品牌服装的一家丹麦公司，直接控告易趣中国。原告声称，易趣上有多达73家商铺以极低的折扣价格，堂而皇之的销售未经授权的ONLY，VERO MODA以及JACK＆JONES的商品，并据此向易趣索赔20万。上海市第一中级人民法院这次并未支持原告的诉讼请求，理由是，作为一个平台，易趣本身并未侵犯原告的商标权，而且它根本无法控制平台上的海量信息。

电子商务平台究竟应扮演什么角色

在知识产权保护方面，淘宝和易趣这类网上平台做得是否到位？淘宝战略市场中心公关经理卢维兴回应到，“淘宝完全遵守中国的法律法规。”他补充到，如果“品牌持有者提出控诉，我们将迅速解决。我们会撤掉有争议的商品，甚至会关闭店铺。”卢提到，“淘宝已经与资生堂，耐克，阿迪达斯等品牌持有者合作，以共同应对这些问题。他们甚至直接在淘宝网上开设自己的零售门面，不仅进行防御，而且主动出击。”

广盛律师事务所的刘律师建议借鉴“安全岗原则”（Safe Goalkeeper’s Principle），该原则在搜索引擎方面行之有效。其规则如下，权利所有人向搜索引擎提出某网站侵权，如果搜索引擎有足够理由相信该网站确系侵权，便必须将其删除。否则，便在其网站上发出公告，并让权利所有人和被告网站自行解决争端。刘律师认为，这对电子商务也同样适用。

但是上海得勤律师事务所的商律师认为，事实上，网上平台应该，并且能够承担更多责任。例如，实行申报制度将会很有效，由此网上平台便能追踪超过一定交易金额的网上店铺的情况。其次，顶级品牌应该获得知识产权保护的优先权。

2007年4月19日，上海市工商行政管理局颁布第二次禁售通告，禁止乔治·阿玛尼、范思哲、巴宝莉、乐斯菲斯、杰尼亚、欧米茄、劳力士等20件顶级品牌在小商品市场销售。2004年10月颁布的第一次禁令禁止包括LV在内的40件顶级商品在小商品市场销售。然而，淘宝和易趣等网上平台目前并无准备借鉴该禁令的迹象。

商律师承认，监管及制裁网上知识产权侵权行为耗资巨大。作为国家动画产业发展基地知识产权中心的秘书长，他目前正负责一个开发电子商务平台网上商铺认证制度的项目。“采取法律行为对付知识产权侵犯问题将耗资巨大，而收效甚微。我们的想法是建立一个第三方系统，为网络平台提供认证服务，并帮助他们在侵权发生之前就主动辨识品牌，积极审查店铺，防患于未然。”

中国的立法与执行

“首先要明白，网上知识产权侵权问题不会比网下的侵权问题更糟。”商律师说道，“事实上，由于实行信誉积分制度，很多时候网上店铺反而更值得信赖。在中国的二级或三级城市，有时你甚至不敢在市中心的百货商店购物。那些路边小店又怎样呢？他们不是也会出售假冒伪劣商品吗？”

“这些年来，中国的网络知识产权保护做得越来越好了。”刘律师补充道，“用我们的行话说，就是最近‘可起诉优质资源’越来越少了。这表明我们在立法和执法方面都有了很大的改进。”

刘律师解释道，虽然存在来自国际的压力，但事实上，中国在网络知识产权保护方面的立法完全符合国际标准，并且政府在促进法律执行上也投入了很多精力，尽管他也承认不同地区所投入的精力也不同。上海地区的执法就快速而高效。刘律师说道，“例如，如果下午接到报告说出现了侵权行为，那么上海警方当天晚上就会采取行动。”自2007年4月20日起，上海在张江高科技园区举办了“知识产权周”（IPR Week）活动，宣传上海地区在知识产权保护，以及大众普及知识产权知识方面所取得的成就。

2006年6月，国家商务部在其网站上发布了《商务部关于网上交易的指导意见（草案征求意见稿）》。国家商务部正准备立法要求网上商家到工商行政管理局进行登记，登记后，在销售时侵犯了知识产权的商家就要付法律责任。该草案在商家间掀起了轩然大波，因为他们的网上交易将因此受到极大影响。该草案将于何时定稿并付诸实施，及其严厉程度目前尚不明朗。

刘律师谈到，与西方国家不同，中国的司法体系很复杂。他说：“西方人只了解人代会颁布的法律条文，其实在法律诉讼中，我们还可以使用最高人民法院和最高人民检察院发布的司法解释，国务院制订的各种行政规章条例，以及各地方的法令法规等。”

中国负责知识产权保护的各类执法机关结构复杂，于事无益。新闻出版总署和版权局其实具一个机构，打两块牌子。此外还有商标局（负责商标注册），知识产权局（负责专利事务），文化部行政执法总队（负责影音产品事务），和工商行政管理总局（负责处理商业秘密和不公平竞争问题）。不熟悉情况的知识产权持有者及其律师们很容易被这种繁杂的机关设置搞得晕头转向，更别提因此而激增的花费问题了。

“一些外国权利人和代理律师在中国输掉知识产权官司后，有时会抱怨中国的法律体系不好。”刘律师补充到，“事实上可能并不完全是这样。我跟法官们交谈过，有时我们认为是原告和他们的律师由于对中国的法律体系不熟悉，在诉讼中的思路和策略可能有问题。”

出现新挑战

一些表面的侵权行为在法律上可能并不得到支持。例如，在像周女士这样的店铺中，如果商家在出售外贸商品时不使用品牌持有者的商标，或此类商标未在中国境内注册，则在法律意义上，商家并未对品牌持有人的商标造成侵权。（刘律师表示，这种情况或许有可能侵犯了版权。）另外还有门槛的问题。许多专卖外贸商品的网上店铺一种款式只有一件或几件商品，他们的交易数量和价值都太少，因此无法被起诉。刘春泉律师给我们讲了个例子，说曾经抓到过一个网上知识产权侵犯者，并对其提起诉讼，但海外的那位品牌持有人却根本不回应中国法院的传唤。

但刘律师认为，知识产权保护的执法方面仍然存在众多挑战。他指出，在中国许多不发达地区，尤其是偏远的城市和乡村，执法机关甚至对自身的网上知识产权保护职责都不甚了解。（刘律师提到中国政府正着手组织这些偏远地区的执法者们进行相关培训。）

此外，刘还谈到，网上侵权问题正变得越来越复杂。他给出了一个网络游戏方面的例子，“服务器的位置设在许多地点，有的甚至在国外，警方很难进行跟踪。而IP地址也有可能是虚拟的，因此很难找到侵权者。”最近，《商业周刊》上的一篇报道引用了一位QBPC（即优质品牌保护委员会，是个专事国内外公司知识产权保护的联合组织）成员的话，“犯罪分子的技术发展比执法机关的要快很多，所以，尽管执法者付出的努力越来越大，但整体上仍然落后于犯罪分子。”文章作者认为，知识产权保护是个全球性问题，因此只关注中国是远远不够的。

“制裁知识产权的侵犯问题需要高昂的成本，”商律师说道，“所以我们才要鼓励建立一种机制，让零售商们能够主动抵制网上及网下的知识产权侵犯行为。”

发布日期 : 2007.04.24