Recently, the final verdict of the lawsuit between Jay Chou, JVR Music Co., Ltd., Guangzhou NetEase Computer System Co., Ltd. and other related parties was announced. According to sources related to "Tianxia 3", the second instance court upheld the original verdict, ruled against Jewell, and dismissed all claims for compensation of 2.05 million yuan. The court found that the hot search topics, entries, and promotional reports related to Jay Chou's new album are extremely common, and the behavior of "Tianxia 3" Weibo self funded forwarding lottery and other feedback to players has no profit-making nature, does not violate the principles of integrity and business ethics, and is difficult to make the public associate Jay Chou with the game through endorsement, authorization, etc. Therefore, the accused behavior of "Tianxia 3" does not constitute unfair competition.
According to data, in July 2022, Jay Chou's new album "The Greatest Work" sparked nationwide attention, and many games such as "Tianxia 3" launched Weibo reposts and lucky draws, giving away the new album at their own expense as a reward to players. Subsequently, Jewell claimed that the unauthorized lottery of "World 3" was not authorized by the official authorities and that legal measures would be taken. Tianxia 3 immediately deleted the related activities and clarified that the behavior had nothing to do with Jay Chou and Jay Chou.
(JVR and "Tianxia 3" release statement)
On April 17, 2023, JVR sued the relevant companies of "Tianxia 3" for unfair competition and demanded a total compensation of 2.05 million yuan. At the beginning of 2024, the first instance court ruled against Jay Chou and Jay Chou and dismissed all claims. During this period, some netizens questioned whether the Apple phone lottery also requires Apple's consent?
Regarding the final verdict of this case, Lawyer Jia Changwei, a partner at Beijing Jincheng Tongda (Shenzhen) Law Firm, believes that celebrities enjoy the same legal rights as ordinary citizens, but it is very common and unavoidable for celebrities to become public topics, and they should bear a certain degree of tolerance obligation and allow others to initiate or participate in related topics normally.
All claims, including a 2.05 million yuan claim, have been rejected
The second instance court held that when Jay Chou released his new album, the hot search topics, entries, and promotional reports related to it were extremely common, and the activity of forwarding, drawing prizes, and giving away albums was also quite common. The self funded lottery and flash sale activities of "Tianxia 3" have a welfare nature and are non-profit activities. The related behaviors do not violate the principles of integrity and business ethics, and do not constitute unfair competition.
In addition, "Tianxia 3" has previously publicly clarified that there is no cooperation relationship between Jay Chou and JVR, and consumers will not associate Jay Chou with endorsement, authorization, or other relationships with the game. The second instance court ultimately ruled in favor of "Tianxia 3" and rejected all litigation requests, including the 2.05 million yuan claim from the Jewell side.
Lawyer: Celebrities should have a certain degree of tolerance obligation
The second instance result is not surprising, "said Gao Jiyuan, Secretary General of the Intellectual Property Department and Professional Committee of Guangdong Zhuojian Law Firm, and a member of the Legal Committee of the Shenzhen Electronic Sports Industry Association." The Anti Unfair Competition Law is not a panacea and should become a lubricant for the commercial society and an adhesive for various departments of intellectual property laws. It should be used with caution.
According to Lawyer Jia Changwei, a partner at Beijing Jincheng Tongda (Shenzhen) Law Firm, as public figures, especially well-known celebrities, it is very common and unavoidable for them to become public topics. Therefore, they should bear a certain degree of tolerance obligation. The law does not explicitly prohibit the use or attachment of celebrity topics in normal commercial activities. As public figures, celebrities should allow others to initiate or participate in celebrity topics in a normal manner
Jia Changwei further pointed out that in cases involving celebrity related rights, the judiciary should respect industrial laws and meet the needs of social development. On the one hand, the court should support the rights holders to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests in accordance with the law, including the protection of reputation, privacy, and portrait rights, to ensure that celebrities can enjoy the same legal rights as ordinary citizens. On the other hand, the court should also prevent related lawsuits from being abused into 'commercial rights protection' and consuming judicial resources. In the case where the market can self regulate and resolve competition conflicts, the law should exercise restraint, avoid excessive intervention, prioritize the resolution of competition conflicts to market mechanisms, and avoid the improper expansion of the scope of unfair competition behavior recognition due to the abuse of general terms