Lawyer team

Email: wangjing@rtlawyer.com.cn
 

Fields of expertise:

Intellectual property rights, anti-unfair competition, and contract law affairs.

Wang Jing mainly engages in legal affair relating to domestic and foreign intellectual property, including design of overall intellectual property protection strategy and program, protection of copyright of film and television, music and text works, copyright services of animation and games, legal consulting of entertainment media, protection of artists’ portrait and reputation rights, legal services for patents and trademarks, etc.
 

Working languages: Chinese, English
 

Educational background:
Master of Law
 

Work experience:

July 2013-August 2018 Lawyer of Shanghai Tenwen Shidai Law Firm
August 2018 to present  Partner and lawyer of Shanghai Ronly & Tenwen Partners
 

Classic cases:

1.  Yuewen Group (Starting Point Chinese Network, etc.) v. Baidu Literature Series Literary Works "Perfect World", "Reckless Wasteland", "Jue Ji" and other copyright infringement cases；

2.  China Literature v. Xunlei Text over infringement of Copyright of the   literary works;

3. Litigation for protecting the rights of Sohu’s film and television works such as A Story of Du Lala’s Promotion and Diors Man;

4.  Tianshi Culture v. Shanghai Jiahe Film and Television over investment dispute; Tianshi Culture v. Dongyang Zifeng Film and Television over investment dispute;

5. Dispute over infringement of the right of signature of chunsooa, a well-known Korean art director in the film Tiny Times 3.0;

6.  Shenzhen Kuaibo v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board over the dispute of trademark rejection; Shenzhen Kuaibo v. Hunan Souyun over contract dispute;

7. Series cases of protection of MiGoo’s trademark;

8.  The case of protection of Shenzhen Yunqu Network’s Kuaiwan Trademark;

9. DooKay v. Shanghai Yiyi Health Technology over the technical service contract dispute;

10.  Skynetasia Teddybear v. Dongyang Best Partner and Shanghai Yanrui et al. over protection of copyright and patents;

11.  China Audio-Video Copyright Association (CAVCA) v. Various KTVs over the disputes regarding infringement of screening rights;

12.  Shanghai Qiannuo Metal v. Jiangsu Xiangsheng and Longchuan Weaving et al. over the dispute regarding invention patent infringement;

13.  Beijing Soauto v. Tangeche over trademark infringement and unfair competition;

14.  Series cases of Iqiyi National Private Theater for rights protection;

15.  Series cases of Youku v. Iqiyi national IPTV over network infringement, etc.

 

Briefing of related well-known cases:

1. Shanghai Xuanting Entertainment Information Technology Co., Ltd. (https://www.qidian.com) v. Baidu Baixun Co., Ltd. (Mobile Baidu) over series of infringement of literary works. The https://www.qidian.com of Shanghai Xuanting Entertainment Information Technology Co., Ltd. is one of the largest platforms for literary readers and writers in China, and is currently the leading original literary portal in China. As the original novel platform with the most intensive copyright resources in China, the website offers a large number of popular novels on the Internet, with more than one million or even 100 million clicks. Therefore, the value of its copyright is huge. Shanghai Tenwen SShidai Law Firm is the designated law firm for protection of the copyright of literary works of Shanghai Xuanting Entertainment Information Technology Co., Ltd. In May 2015, it was found in the monitoring that, “Mobile Baidu” APP developed and operated by Baidu had infringed the copyright of Xuanting Company by spreading a large number of well-known novels without the genuine authorization. The infringement was extremely rampant and the impact is extremely serious. Authorized by Xuanting Company, the law firm immediately preserved the evidence, and filed an infringement lawsuit;

2. Shenzhen Kuaibo v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board over the dispute of trademark rejection. Shenzhen Kuaibo applied for the registration of “Traffic Ore” trademark in the service field under Category 35 “Marketing for others, and management of computer documents”. After the registration was rejected by the Trademark Office, the company applied for re-examination. However, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board rejected the application for re-examination on the grounds that the underlying trademark fell under the circumstances referred to in Paragraph 1 (3) of Article 11 and Article 30 of the Trademark Law. After full research, we sued the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court on behalf of Kaibo, and expressed the opinion that the combination of “traffic” and “ore” was not common but carried obvious specific meanings as a whole and that its use in terms of registration categories will not cause the relevant public to understand it as a description of the content or characteristics of related services. After two trials of the case, the Beijing High Court finally supported our opinion and rejected the appeal of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board;

3. Series cases of protection of MiGoo’s trademark. The Chinese ”MiGoo" trademark under multiple categories were applied and owned by China Mobile Group, and then authorized to MiGoo Company, a subsidiary of the group for specific use. In view of the various infringement to the use of MiGoo word trademark in the current market, we launched a series of monitoring and rights protection after coordination with MiGoo Company.
 

Career testimonials:

The professionalism is the soul of a lawyer’s practice, and it is the highest praise from the client! I will continue my unremitting efforts!