To protect the intellectual property rights of seed industry is to protect “rice bowl safety”!Ten cases of seed set licensing dispute case

2022-05-23 0 By

On the morning of January 22, 2022, the results of the selection of “Top 10 Cases in 2021 for Promoting The Rule of Law in the New Era” co-sponsored by the Supreme People’s Court and the China Media Group were announced, and the first special program of “Top 10 Cases in 2021 for Promoting the Rule of Law in the New Era” was broadcast on CCTV News channel.Comprehensive netizen vote result, by expert committee selection, seed set of brand infringement dispute case selected ten cases.Seeds are the “chip” of agriculture. The protection of intellectual property rights in the seed industry concerns national food security and the self-reliance of agricultural science and technology.General Secretary Xi Jinping stressed that the security of seed sources should be elevated to a strategic height related to national security, and the seed industry should be self-reliant and self-controlled in science and technology.”Jinjing 818″ rice variety is a new plant variety developed by Tianjin Rice Research Institute, and Jiangsu Jindi Seed Science and Technology Co., Ltd. has the exclusive right to implement it.Without permission, Jiangsu Qingtilan Agricultural Industry Development Co., Ltd. seeks for potential traders through wechat group, provides “Gold Japonica 818” seed trading information after charging membership fees, and arranges delivery according to buyers’ needs.Goldland thought that pro-tilling company’s behavior constituted infringement and appealed to the court to order pro-tilling company to stop the infringement and compensate for economic losses of 3 million yuan.The pro-cultivator company said that it only provided the information of seeds kept by itself to both the supply and demand of seeds, and the supply and demand of seeds traded by themselves. It did not sell “Jinjing 818” rice seeds that were accused of infringement.The first-instance court held that the pro-tilling company’s assistance in concluding the involved seed deal constituted an infringement and applied punitive damages, ruling in favor of all the claims of Gemdale.Pro-tilling appealed against the ruling.The Supreme People’s Court of the second instance held that the pro-tilling company should be identified as the organizer and decision maker of the transaction, which constituted sales infringement, and the first-instance court corrected the aiding infringement.Pro-tilling Company did not obtain the seed production and operation license, illegally sold “white bag” seeds, the infringement is serious, the first-instance court according to the compensation base two times of the application of punitive compensation is correct, so the judgment rejected the appeal, maintain the original judgment.The expert case evaluation group believes that the dispute over the infringement of seed sets promotes the process of rule of law in the new era.To protect the intellectual property rights of seed industry is to protect “rice bowl safety”!Editor: Song Jiajie Source: Supreme People’s Court