Tencent: Nora is a violation of the interests of the whole industry
ITzhijia· 2016-06-21 22:06:42
6 Sept. 21, Nora v. Shenzhen Municipal Supervision Bureau fined 260 million case, has been on June 21, 2016 (today) 9:00 in the Guangdong High Court held a public hearing, the court will choose a sentencing date has ended. Shenzhen city Tencent computer system Co. Ltd. as the third people participated in the trial, the Guangdong court trial broadcast network was broadcast live on the trial.
2014 in March 18th, the Tencent Inc to the market supervision administration of Shenzhen complained that the company violated the rights of the work involved in broadcast their own information network transmission, the request shall be punished. Nora company refused to accept the above treatment decision, within the statutory time limit to apply for administrative reconsideration of the Copyright Bureau of Guangdong province. In the administrative reconsideration, Nora company refused to accept the verdict, the market supervision administration of Shenzhen Municipality on matters involving administrative punishment powers, administrative procedure law and administrative punishment according to the lack of administrative punishment, the amount of improper grounds, appeal to the hospital, the hospital after by the collegial panel in accordance with law, decided to open hearing the case. The
in this trial, our lawyers believe that the Shenzhen Municipal Supervision Bureau to help clear the rival Tencent that was fast, the market supervision administration of Shenzhen city administrative punishment authority, illegal administrative procedure and administrative punishment according to the lack of administrative punishment, the amount of improper matters involving. Nora and Tencent is a competitor, although Nora is a small company, but not backward in technology, market supervision administration of Shenzhen municipality to impose significant fines on easy fast, just according to the Tencent stakeholders of the story, is to help the Tencent remove a rival.
and the appellant Shenzhen Market Supervision Bureau said the 3 points to respond, first, Nora active editing and finishing infringement video. Nora company's own staff of the record called the active collection of video, according to market demand and popular words to edit recommended. second, Nora company will be pirated copy of the original video , finally, Nora company also provide genuine and other sources of piracy. and said, Nora company received three times the request of the Tencent to shield the infringement of the link, but has not yet been screened.
as the third Tencent, the Defense said, Nora infringement of the four elements. It is reported that the four major elements include, first, is illegal, second party infringement damages caused in third, there is a causal relationship between the illegal behavior and the fact of damage, the implementation of fourth illegal behavior existence fault, such as subjective intention. At the same time, the Tencent said, Nora in search results before the three mark for the broadcast content, thus it can be seen that Nora not only provide infringement small links, also provides links to infringing content, orientation and content infringement. Nora existence of the existence of the act of aiding the infringement. at the same time, Nora was also a Tencent, music, music, Sohu and other influential content side of the complaint, Nora not only constitutes a tort, but also against the public interest.
and lawyers believe that Nora is just losing oboth search function, do not take the initiative to provide the infringing products. and, Nora company does not involve the infringement of public interest. Although the appellant is a small company, but due to the technical leader, has become a direct competitor of the third parties (Tencent). The
trial has ended, Guangdong court said the case will choose a sentencing date.