TYGlobe

Case Summary

Plaintiff Xuanmou Company is the copyright owner of the novel *Qing Yu Nian (Joy of Life)*. Plaintiff Shengmou Company, upon due authorization, developed the *Qing Yu Nian* mobile game (hereinafter referred to as the "Rights-Holding Game") and authorized Plaintiff Shumou Company to operate and promote the aforesaid game. Defendant Qimou Company used such names as "Qing Yu Nian Ji", "Qing Yu Ji Mobile Game", "Qing Yu Ji" and "Qing Yu Dynasty" for a game it operates, with the characters "Qing Yu" particularly highlighted, and made the game available for download on multiple platforms. The said game has no connection whatsoever with the Rights-Holding Game. Qimou Company also used the image of "Wuzhu", a classic character from the work *Qing Yu Nian*, as the icon of the aforesaid game. The three plaintiffs filed a lawsuit with the court, requesting the court to order Qimou Company to cease all infringing acts, eliminate adverse effects, and compensate for economic losses and reasonable expenses.

The court held after trial that "Qing Yunian" is not a fixed collocation. Following the broadcast of the TV series *Qing Yunian* and extensive publicity of the mobile game of the same name, the name "Qing Yunian" has gained relatively high reputation among the relevant public. Shortly after the broadcast of the TV series *Qing Yunian* and the launch of the game *Rights Game* by Shengmou Company and Shumou Company, Qimou Company introduced and provided download services for the aforesaid *Rights Game* on third-party game websites. Instead of using the real name of the game, it adopted a game name similar to "Qing Yunian", an icon essentially identical to the profile picture of the character "Wuzhu", or applied the signature eye-covering feature of "Wuzhu" in the character profile picture, and claimed on multiple websites that "Qing Yuji" is a game adapted from the novel of the same name. Such publicity method enables the relevant public to immediately associate the game with "Qing Yunian" and question whether there is any connection between the two upon seeing the game's name, images and content introduction, which is prone to misleading relevant players, thus boosting the game's popularity and download volume, seizing game market share and attracting players to obtain higher profits. Qimou Company obviously has the subjective intent and fault of seeking illegitimate benefits by riding on the reputation of the work "Qing Yunian", and its act constitutes unfair competition in the form of false publicity.

Summary

In the present case, Qiyu Company committed two infringing acts when promoting the games it operates. Firstly, its use of the image of the character "Wu Zhu" from the well-known novel *Qing Yu Nian* constitutes infringement upon the copyright of works of fine art. Secondly, its use of textual expressions including "Qing Yu Ji", "Jiuzhou Qing Yu Ji", "Qing Yu Huangchao", "Qing Yu Nian Ji" and "the novel of the same name" in the process of promotion is sufficient to mislead players into believing that the game is associated with *Qing Yu Nian*, which constitutes an act of unfair competition in the form of false publicity.

Copyright infringement is a relatively common and easily understandable issue, and will not be elaborated excessively herein. The false publicity mentioned herein is another issue that requires special attention during the process of game operation and promotion. Its core feature is the dissemination of false information, which causes misidentification among consumers. In the present case, the relevant promotional content claimed that the game was adapted from the novel of the same name, and used characters such as "Qing Yu" and "Nian" in a split manner. However, judging from the content of the infringing game, it has no connection whatsoever with *Qing Yu Nian* in fact.

In the fierce market competition, various acts such as free-riding and wrongfully exploiting others' well-known reputation are common and cannot be completely avoided. The slightest negligence that leads to an accidental crossing of legal boundaries may constitute infringement.