The Beijing Internet Court has concluded its first online trial, which related to a copyright claim by short-video platform Douyin against competitor Huopai over alleged unauthorized use of its video products.

The key feature of these Internet courts is that litigants can deal with their lawsuits entirely online.  China has three such courts, in Hangzhou, Guangzhou and Beijing. 

Douyin claimed that the Baidu-backed Huopai had downloaded a short video clip published on its platform without permission, and then uploaded it to its own app, allowing users to download it. Douyin demanded 1 million yuan ($145.674.91) in compensation and 50,000 yuan in costs. 

The main points of the case were whether the plaintiff and the defendant were qualified parties, whether short web videos can be regarded as “work” as defined under copyright law, and whether the defendant’s actions constituted an infringement. 

According to the trial judge Wen Zhang, the two sides were qualified parties and Douyin’s short video in this case could be regarded as “work” as defined under copyright law but Huopai, as a network service provider, didn’t commit an infringement based on a “safe harbour” and a “notice/takedown” procedure. All the claims of the plaintiff were thus dismissed. 

The year 2018 saw an explosion of 15-30 second user-generated videos in China. 

北京互联网法院第一案宣判

北京互联网法院第一案：“抖音短视频”诉“伙拍小视频”侵犯信息网络传播权案正式宣判。

据悉，一起案件的起诉、调解、立案、送达、庭审等诉讼环节都能通过北京互联网法院电子诉讼平台全程网上办理。中国目前共有三家互联网法院，分别在杭州、广州、北京。

一条“抖音”APP上的短视频，被用户上传到百度公司拥有的“伙拍小视频”，因为短视频原作者与抖音签订独家协议，“抖音”APP所有者北京微播视界科技有限公司遂将百度公司和上传视频的用户告上法庭，要求赔偿经济损失费100万元及诉讼合理支出5万元。

本案的争议焦点有三点：一是原被告公司是否为适格主体，二是该作品是否构成“类编作品”，三是被告行为是否构成侵权。

主审法官为院长张雯。法院推定，原被告均为适格的主体，同时法院也认定该视频具备独创性，构成类编作品。二被告在接到原告的电子邮件通知后，及时删除了视频，被告作为网络服务的提供者，符合信息网络传播权保护条例规定的“避风港”原则，最终法院认为，二被告不应承担责任，并且驳回了原告的诉讼请求。

2018年中国短视频领域发展势头强劲，用户数量持续增长。

To contact the editorial team, please email ALBEditor@thomsonreuters.com.