Case Background
This Firm represented a US educational testing service provider (Plaintiff) in a copyright dispute with a prominent Chinese training institution (Defendant). Since the mid-1990s, the Defendant had continuously copied and sold GMAT/TOEFL test questions developed by the Plaintiff. Despite administrative investigations by the Administration for Industry and Commerce (AIC) in 1996-1997 and signing cease-and-desist undertakings, the Defendant persisted in distributing infringing materials via physical bookstores and cross-border websites.
Case Difficulties
- Obstacle to Identifying Copyright Subject Matter: Defendant claimed “test questions are not protected by copyright.”
- Abuse of Fair Use Defense: Argued “teaching purposes” justified commercial copying activities.
- Difficulty Preserving Cross-Border Infringement Evidence: Website evidence easily destroyed, overseas downloaders hard to track.
- Complexity of Damages Calculation: Infringement period lasted 8 years.
This Firm's Service Highlights
1.Rigorous Argumentation for Test Question Copyright:
- Deconstructed question creation process: Each question requires a 7-person team working for 2 years.
- Cited Article 2, Implementing Regulations of the Copyright Law, confirming status as original intellectual creation.
2.Clarifying Boundaries of Fair Use:
- Refuted “teaching purposes” defense: Contrasted classroom instruction with commercial sales.
- Exposed profit-driven nature (annual revenue exceeding RMB 2 billion).
3.Constructing Ironclad Cross-Border Evidence Chain:
- Notarized purchase of physical infringing materials in November 2000.
- Notarized download of website infringing content in December 2000.
- Linked to 1997 cease-and-desist undertakings (admitting infringement).
4.Innovative Damages Model Design:
- Used “License Fee Multiples Method” instead of calculating infringing profits.
- Included attorney fees as reasonable costs of enforcing rights.
Case Results
1.Copyright Milestone Confirmation:
- Final judgment affirmed that standardized test questions constitute works protected under copyright law.
2.Comprehensive Injunction Enforcement:
- Ordered immediate cessation of copying, selling, and online dissemination.
- Compelled destruction of infringing materials and printing films.
3.High Damages Awarded:
- Full RMB 1.74 million economic loss compensation supported.
- RMB 141,000 reasonable costs for enforcing rights approved.
4.Industry Rule Reshaping:
- Clarified that “fair use for classroom teaching” does not apply to commercial training institutions.
- Established judicial recognition standards for cross-border online evidence collection.
Table of Contents
