![]() The works of fine art in the actual combat scenes and other gaming art and design assets do not constitute similarity as a whole. The Plaintiff has not copyrighted the contents, such as the Game Zones/Channels, players’ information and game items’ name in BNB.Ģ. The court of first instance heard the case and held that:ġ. Therefore, NEXON brought the above mentioned companies to courts. Beijing Wanzhong Heli Technology Co., Ltd provided rechargeable card services for QQ堂, and therefore undertook conduct that constituted joint infringement. After comparison between BNB and QQ堂, NEXON thought that Tencent had committed infringement upon the various copyrights of BNB, such as written works, works of fine art and art design, alleging that QQ Tang had copied the fundamental elements of BNB, such as the variations of the game, content of the game and art and design assets. The defendant Tencent began to operate an online game named “ QQ 堂” in Chinese and “ QQ Tang” in English in the end of 2004. NEXON made a copyright registration in Korea on Jand started a cooperation of its operation in Mainland China with Shanda Games Limited ( NASDAQ: GAME) from 2003. ![]() NEXON developed an online game in 2001 named “ BNB” (or “ Crazy Arcade”) in English and “ 泡泡堂” in Chinese, and operated BNB in Korea until recently. Shenzhen Technology Computer Systems Company Limited (the “Tencent”)Ĭourt of First Instance: Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court No.: (2006)一中民初字第8564号Ĭourt of Second Instance: we have no further information of the appeal. Plaintiff: NEXON HOLDINGS LIMITED (the “NEXON”)ĭefendants: Tencent Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd The case in today’s post will elucidate this principle. Considering that online games act as computer software, laws protect its “ code” other than game mode and method. In recent years, there has been a serious plagiarism problem in the field of online games. Works without originality are not protected by these laws. For the purposes of the Copyright Law, “ works” refer to original intellectual creations in the literary, artistic and scientific domain, insofar as they are capable of being reproduced in a specific tangible form. (By Luo Yanjie) Abstract: The Copyright Law protects “ expression” rather than “ thought”.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |