China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China’s Bilibili Ruled Liable for Allowing Dissemination of Infringing Videos

Mon, 19 Sep 2022
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 4 Aug. 2022, the “Trial Information of Being Courts” (bjcourt.gov.cn) released the civil judgment of a dispute between MOOC-CN Information Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (北京慕华信息科技有限公司, hereinafter the “plaintiff”) and Shanghai Kuanyu Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (上海宽娱数码科技有限公司, hereinafter the “defendant”), where the defendant was alleged to infringe on the plaintiff’s right to information network dissemination.

The defendant is the operator of Bilibili, China’s fourth largest video-sharing platform.

In the case, the plaintiff claimed that it had the exclusive network dissemination right of the course “Financial Analysis and Decision Making” taught by Professor Xiao Xing of Tsinghua University, and thus accused the defendant of abetting and aiding infringement on the grounds that Bilibili had provided the pirated videos to its users for a long time, failing to perform its duty by deleting or blocking those videos.

According to Article 1169 of China’s Civil Code, those who abet or aid others to commit acts of infringement shall assume joint and several liability with the perpetrator.

In the court’s view, the defendant had failed to perform its duty of reasonable care to users’ infringing uploads while allowing the videos to be disseminated and recommended, which had constituted an act of abetting and aiding infringement and violated the plaintiff’s right to information network dissemination of the videos involved. After the trial, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, requiring the defendant to compensate for economic losses and reasonable expenses of over CNY 440,000.

 

 

Cover Photo by Lin Zhang on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)

IOMed Settles First Case, Resolving China-Singapore Maritime Dispute

The newly established International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) has successfully resolved its inaugural case—a maritime charter dispute between Chinese and Singaporean parties—marking a major milestone for the world’s first government-backed global mediation body.

China Overhauls Arbitration Law for Global Alignment

Having entered into force on March 1, 2026, China’s first comprehensive revision of its 1995 Arbitration Law has introduced ad hoc arbitration, strengthened interim relief, and aligned the legal framework more closely with international standards.