[Case No.] (2020) Supreme People’s Court Zhi Min Zhong No. 155
[Basic case] Siemens Software, which is the copyright owner of the NX series of software, filed a lawsuit with the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court on the grounds that Wofu's unauthorized use of the software involved in product design and manufacturing constituted infringement. In response to the application of Siemens Software, the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court went to Wofu to conduct evidence preservation.
During the period, the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court served a preservation ruling, detailed the preservation measures to be taken and the legal consequences of refusing to cooperate with the preservation. According to the on-site inventory, there are 26 computers in the design office of Wofu Company.
After the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court preserved 17 computers and found that nine of them were installed with the software involved, Wofu suddenly took countermeasures by refusing to turn on some computers, cutting off power, robbing court cameras, and preventing court staff from leaving. Such methods hindered the preservation of evidence and forced the termination of the preservation work.
The Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court ordered Wofu to stop the infringement and ordered Wofu to compensate Siemens Software for economic losses of 500,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of 100,000 yuan for rights protection in accordance with the statutory upper limit of compensation. The Intellectual Property Tribunal of the Supreme People's Court comprehensively considered Wofu’s infringements, the price of the software involved, and Wofu’s circumstances in this case that prevented the court’s evidence preservation without justifiable reasons, and judged Wofu to compensate Siemens Software for more than 2.61 million yuan economic losses and a reasonable expenditure of 100,000 yuan for rights protection.
[Typical significance] This case equally protects the legitimate rights and interests of foreign parties in accordance with the law, clarifies the consequences of the litigation participants obstructing the preservation of evidence, and takes the accused infringer's performance in the litigation as a consideration for determining damages. The decision in this case to increase the penalties for the parties who interfered with the preservation of evidence has important guiding significance for guiding the parties to litigate in good faith.
