With the booming development of e-commerce, It's safe to say, The Internet market has disrupted the development of retail industry to some extent. For example, According to a recent ranking of online marketplaces, Amazon gets about 1 million visitors per month worldwide 60 Billion times, And in Southeast Asia, E-commerce platform Shopee And online shopping sites Lazada The monthly visitors add up to more than 4 Billion times.
however, It's easier than ever for sellers to connect with buyers, And both genuine and fake sellers can use e-commerce platforms. Anyone can sign up for an account on the platform and start selling immediately, Not subject to scrutiny or due diligence.
so, Whether online marketplaces are responsible for intellectual property infringement?
recently, In Malaysia A&M Beauty Wellness Sdn Bhd (A&M Beauty) v Shopee Mobile Malaysia Sdn Bhd (Shopee) In the case, Court vs Shopee and Lazada And other online marketplaces have clarified the responsibility that platform sellers should bear for intellectual property infringement.
FACTS
After receiving no positive response to the complaint, plaintiff A&M Beauty The court filed a petition against Shopee ban, To prohibit unauthorized third parties from selling the tape on the platform AM Brand name goods.
adjudication
Although the court ruled that Shopee The determination of infringement is not disputed, But the court refused on the following grounds Shopee Grant an injunction:
Recognition by the court Shopee It may not be able to police all its sellers. Shopee There is no technical capability or resources to pre-filter each list or apply automatic masking mechanisms. Due to A&M Beauty The injunction sought calls for the complete removal of lists that meet certain criteria, The court found the injunction unenforceable or enforceable. In addition, Such a precedent would greatly disrupt the entire e-commerce market.
Shopee Only one platform is provided, Neither is the seller of the product, Nor is it an agent or representative of a third party seller.
The court needs to decide between an injunction and an injunction in the plaintiff's interest Shopee Strike a balance between the consequences. If the ban could create a higher risk of injustice, The court should not have granted the injunction. In this case, Because the plaintiff failed to prove the need for an injunction, Balance of convenience (the balance of convenience) Principle is more conducive to not issuing injunctions. contrary, Manually removing the product from the market can prove extremely difficult and impractical, Shopee It is impossible to comply with an order requiring it to block a product page before it is uploaded.
The court also ruled that, Because the plaintiff is not the registered owner, There is therefore no legal standing to seek such relief, Nor was the court able to commit it meaningfully to damages. The court further ruled, In this case, Monetary compensation is an appropriate remedy.
comment
Allow thousands (Or millions) Easy access and registration of active seller accounts is fundamental to the growth of online marketplaces, And one of the reasons for its success. The court's decision will bring a distinctly relaxed atmosphere to the online marketplace, The continued existence of online marketplaces benefits the public by encouraging competition and stimulating the economy.
In spite of this, Nor is it disputed that counterfeiters are proliferating, Online marketplaces provide more channels for them to use. Therefore, More measures must also be taken to curb fake and inferior products. (Compiled from www. lexology. com)
Reprinted from China Intellectual Property Network translation: Wang Dan proofread: Rason group
disclaimer: This network reprint or compile the original article from the Internet, Does not represent the views of this website or confirm the authenticity of its content. If the source is mislabeled or the copyright of the article is involved, Please contact this website, This network will be corrected in due course, delete, thank you.
Patent infringement rights protection