For foreign companies aiming to safeguard their intellectual property in China, collecting reliable evidence can feel like a daunting task—especially when violations happen away from public attention. Traditionally, notarization has been the preferred method, but it often requires significant time and financial resources. Now, a groundbreaking court ruling has approved a new, efficient alternative: Trusted Timestamps. This advanced digital forensic tool recently played a key role in winning a trademark infringement case, demonstrating its effectiveness and promise. Explore this case study to learn how your business can use this innovative approach to strengthen its IP protection throughout China.
Case Study: The Legitimacy of Using Trusted Timestamps as Evidence in Trademark Enforcement in China
- Background
A well-known sports functional drink brand (referred to as the Rights Holder) holds strong recognition in the Chinese market. Since 2015, however, the Rights Holder discovered that a functional drink authorized by another company (the Infringer) was being sold in small and medium-sized towns and rural areas. This product not only bore a name very similar to the Rights Holder brand but also had nearly identical bottle shape, beverage color, and overall packaging design. This caused significant consumer confusion and seriously harmed the Rights Holder brand reputation and sales.
- Litigation and Key Issue
In July 2016, the Rights Holder initiated legal action against the Infringer for trademark infringement and unfair competition. The main dispute centered on the validity of the evidence: the Rights Holder submitted a video showing the purchase of the infringing product, which was recorded using Trusted Timestamp software. The Infringer contested the legality of this evidence collection method, claiming that the evidence was defective and insufficient to prove the alleged infringement.
- Court Decision
Following several trial sessions, the court ultimately determined that the Infringer had engaged in trademark infringement and unfair competition, ordering them to stop the infringement and pay damages. This ruling sets a significant legal precedent for brand owners fighting against counterfeit goods in China.
- Key Judicial Point
The court confirmed that a Trusted Timestamp certificate can reliably demonstrate who had what electronic data at what time and is resistant to tampering and forgery. Unless there is sufficient opposing evidence to disprove it, the court will recognize the authenticity of such evidence.
Legal Analysis: Why Was the Trusted Timestamp Evidence Accepted?
For foreign companies operating in China, understanding the rationale behind the acceptance of this evidence is essential. The main question in this case was whether evidence of a Trusted Timestamp obtained by the rights holder themselves should be admissible in court.
- Trusted Timestamp Evidence Complies with Chinese Legal Standards for Electronic Evidence
A Trusted Timestamp is a service offered by an authorized third-party provider that combines China official time source with advanced cryptographic technology. It effectively verifies the creation time and the integrity of the content of an electronic file (such as a video). According to China Electronic Signature Law, electronic files that meet certain criteria are regarded as legal originals, meaning their content can be reliably assured to be complete and unaltered since their creation.
In this case, the video evidence collected by the Rights Holder, after undergoing the Trusted Timestamp verification, exactly matched its verification file, demonstrating the integrity of its content and confirming it had not been modified. This fully satisfies the formal requirements for electronic data as a recognized category of evidence under China Civil Procedure Law.
Official Timestamp Processing Guideline
- The Trusted Timestamp Technology Guarantees the Evidence Authenticity and Objectivity
The credibility of the evidence in this case is based on its sophisticated technical process, which makes tampering nearly impossible:
- Simultaneous Capture and Certification: The collector activated the phone GPS, recorded the video using a specialized app, and immediately requested a Trusted Timestamp. After recording, the video had to be uploaded to the service center for certification before it could be saved; otherwise, it would be automatically deleted. This process ensures that certification is required before saving, happening simultaneously and preventing any chance of editing after recording.
- Tamper-Resistant Information: Once certified, a unique verification file is created. Any slight change to the video length, name, or other details would cause a mismatch between the video and the verification file, leading to failed verification.
- Locked Time and Location Data: The verification file accurately records the video creation time, location (longitude and latitude), and the collector’s details, which exactly correspond to the site of the infringement, forming a complete chain of evidence.
This record-and-certify-simultaneously approach is fundamentally different from the traditional method of recording a video first and certifying it afterward. The traditional method only verifies the upload time, whereas this approach secures the original creation time and location data, giving the evidence much stronger probative value.
- Growing Judicial Acceptance of This Evidence Collection Method
Even prior to this case, Chinese courts had already accepted similar Trusted Timestamp evidence in various intellectual property cases, especially those involving online image copyright infringement. In these instances, the method is widely acknowledged, and its evidentiary value is regarded as comparable to that of notarized evidence. The importance of this case lies in the court expansion of this acceptance from the online context to offline scenarios involving physical sales evidence collection.
Implications for Foreign Companies
For foreign enterprises dealing with infringement issues in China, this case provides valuable guidance:
Traditionally, obtaining notarized evidence through a notary public has been considered the most reliable way to secure proof. However, in practice, infringing activities often take place in remote locations where notarized evidence collection is challenging due to factors like difficult transportation, high expenses, and safety concerns.
This case illustrates that when notarized evidence collection is impractical, employing technological tools such as Trusted Timestamps to gather evidence independently is an effective and economical alternative. Provided the evidence collection process is properly standardized and maintains a complete chain of custody, courts tend to accept such evidence unless the infringer presents a strong counterargument. This significantly reduces the difficulty and cost of enforcing rights, creating a new and effective approach for proactive intellectual property protection in the Chinese market.
Should you have any inquiries, please do not hesitate to contact us at [wenwen82cn@vip.163.com].