[Wenhui Bao APP] Internet-enabledTrial Method Innovation HelpsIntellectual Property CourtsStandardize Case Hearing through Remote Video

October 31, 2018 Wenhui Bao APP

Recently, with the aid of internet technology, Shanghai Intellectual Property Court (hereinafter referred to as SIPC) held a pretrial conference on a dispute over the infringement of computer software copyright. One party of the case was in South Korea. Through the remote video, the party from afar participated in the case hearing and made him/herself fully heard. The whole process was recorded in writing and video, which provided convenience for the parties and guaranteed the litigious right.

This trial practice owes much to the integration of the Internet technology and trial as well as the recent establishment of theOperation Rules for Case Hearing Through Remote Video (hereinafter referred to as the Rules)by SIPC.

Over more than three years since the establishment of SIPC, the number of cases heard by the Court has been on the rise year by year. To improve the efficiency of trial, SIPC has proactively introducedremote video for the hearing of simple cases to facilitate the trial and closure. The Rules defines the range of cases for remote video trial, mainly including the case of the first instance that has been well prepared with evidence exchange and the pretrial conference as well as the case of the second instance with no factual disputes.

The cases with an objection to subject matter jurisdiction account for 90% of the cases tried by SIPCthrough the Internet. In such cases, both parties generally do not have adequate evidence. In addition, one party may live in a different province or city and, thus, have to shuttle back and forth. As a result, the litigation cost for such cases is high, despite short time required for their hearing. Thanks to internet courts, the court may hear cases with an objection to subject matter jurisdictionthrough remote video upon the consent of both parties.This trial method is highly appraised for its guarantee ofthe litigious rights of the parties and quick closure of cases.

In late August, 27 cases with an objection to subject matter jurisdiction were heard on the internet court through remote video at SIPCin less than one houraltogether. Upon deliberationbased on the opinions and final statements of the parties, the collegial panel would make its decision five days after the hearing. Trials through the Internet bring the parties and the court as close as possible, saving time for the parties with the help of data.

The Rules stipulates that remote video trials should be in line with the principles of legal publicity, voluntariness, efficiency as well as safety and standardization to guarantee the parties' right to know, right to choose and the right to raise objections.

Courts must obtain the consent of the parties beforecarrying out remote video trial. Therefore, SIPC especially works out the Notification of the Case with Remote Video Trial and Confirmation of the Case with Remote Video Trial.These documents are sent to the parties and other litigant participants by a judge assistant through e-mail, fax or posting 10 days before the hearing. The parties and other litigant participants who agree to attend the remote video hearing shall sign on the confirmation letter.

In the Rules, specific provisions are developed for the online transfer of evidence demonstration and the hearing records in the hearing and the whole-process record of the hearing. Thisenables security and real-time trial and makesremote video hearing efficient.

Recently, SIPC pronounced judgment on the dispute over a computer software development contract via the Internet court. In the two court hearings, the plaintiff and the defendant participated in the whole process of trial through video connection in Shanghai and Chongqing, respectively. It took 51 days to close this case. However, the general trial period of technical intellectual property case is quite long. Thus, the trial of this case demonstrates the high efficiency of Internet trial.

Technical dispute facts should be ascertained during the trial of intellectual property cases. For this reason, technical hearing or expert witness's statement on technical issues in the court are required for some cases. Based on the characteristics of intellectual property cases, the Rules stipulates that remote video trialsare suitable for all links of the trial including case opening, conciliation, hearing, consultation, inquisition and determination to improve trial efficiency.

For example, in the trial of a dispute over the computer software development contract at SIPC, video evidence demonstration was achieved with video connected to the witness who could not appear at the court. With this method, witness verification and cross-examination of the party were completed. Another example was the trial of the dispute over infringement of an invention patent. In this case, the parties and their agents as well as the expert group members of the identification institution were all in Beijing. In order to save the litigation cost and improve the hearing efficiency, the technical hearing was held through remote video upon the agreement of the parties. The hearing was originally expected to last for a day to investigate and conduct hearing of technical facts. With the aid of remote video, this process was shortened to only 4 hours, greatly facilitating the trial.

The rapid development of the Internet has provided new impetus for the modernization of judicial capacity. "The full use of the Internet-based trial method can effectively save litigation costs for the parties, save judicial resources and improve court trial efficiency.” Meanwhile, through the formulation of the Rules, various links of Internet trials can be further standardized to ensure that the remote video proceedings are open and transparent. Fairness and justice can be realized more efficiently in a way that the parties can see and feel. Through the innovation oftrial methods, the effect of judicial protection innovation can be improved, said Li Shulman, Vice President of Shanghai Intellectual Property Court (He Yi, Chen Yingying)