| 最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》若干问题的解释法释〔2022〕9号《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法〉若干问题的解释》已于2022年1月29日由最高人民法院审判委员会第1862次会议通过，现予公布，自2022年3月20日起施行。最高人民法院2022年3月16日最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》若干问题的解释（2022年1月29日最高人民法院审判委员会第1862次会议通过，自2022年3月20日起施行）为正确审理因不正当竞争行为引发的民事案件，根据《中华人民共和国民法典》《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》等有关法律规定，结合审判实践，制定本解释。 | | Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Law of the People’s Republic of China against Unfair CompetitionFa Shi [2022] No. 9The Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Law of the People’s Republic of China against Unfair Competition, adopted at the 1862nd session of the Adjudication Committee of the Supreme People’s Court on 29 January 2022, is hereby promulgated, effective 20 March 2022.Supreme People’s Court16 March 2022Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Law of the People’s Republic of China against Unfair Competition(Adopted at the 1862nd session of the Adjudication Committee of the Supreme People’s Court on 29 January 2022, effective 20 March 2022)This Interpretation is enacted pursuant to the provisions of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, the Law of the People’s Republic of China against Unfair Competition, the Civil Procedural Law of the People’s Republic of China and related laws, taking into account the trial practice, for the purpose of proper trial of civil cases arising from unfair competition. |
| 第一条 经营者扰乱市场竞争秩序，损害其他经营者或者消费者合法权益，且属于违反反不正当竞争法第二章及专利法、商标法、著作权法等规定之外情形的，人民法院可以适用反不正当竞争法第二条予以认定。 | | Article 1 Where an undertaking disrupts the market competition order and harms the legitimate rights and interests of other undertakings or consumers, which falls under the circumstances other than those in violation of the provisions of Chapter II of the Law against Unfair Competition, the Patent Law, the Trademark Law and the Copyright Law, among others, the People’s Court may rule in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
| 第二条 与经营者在生产经营活动中存在可能的争夺交易机会、损害竞争优势等关系的市场主体，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第二条规定的“其他经营者”。 | | Article 2 Any market player that has possible relationship with an undertaking such as competition for transaction opportunities or damage of competitive advantages in the production and business operation activities may be deemed by the People’s Court as “other undertaking” as stipulated in Article 2 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
第三条 特定商业领域普遍遵循和认可的行为规范，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第二条规定的“商业道德”。
人民法院应当结合案件具体情况，综合考虑行业规则或者商业惯例、经营者的主观状态、交易相对人的选择意愿、对消费者权益、市场竞争秩序、社会公共利益的影响等因素，依法判断经营者是否违反商业道德。人民法院认定经营者是否违反商业道德时，可以参考行业主管部门、行业协会或者自律组织制定的从业规范、技术规范、自律公约等。 | | Article 3 The code of conduct generally observed and recognized in specific commercial fields may be deemed by the People’s Court as “business ethics” as stipulated in Article 2 of the Law against Unfair Competition.
The People’s Court shall judge whether an undertaking violates business ethics pursuant to the law, in light of the specific circumstances of a case and in comprehensive consideration of the factors such as industry rules or business practices, the subjective state of undertakings, the choice willingness of transaction counterparties, the impact on the rights and interests of consumers, market competition order and public interests, etc.
When determining whether an undertaking violates business ethics, the People’s Court may refer to the code of practice, technical specifications and self-regulatory conventions formulated by the competent authorities of the industries, industry associations or self-regulatory organizations. |
第四条 具有一定的市场知名度并具有区别商品来源的显著特征的标识，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第六条规定的“有一定影响的”标识。
人民法院认定反不正当竞争法第六条规定的标识是否具有一定的市场知名度，应当综合考虑中国境内相关公众的知悉程度，商品销售的时间、区域、数额和对象，宣传的持续时间、程度和地域范围，标识受保护的情况等因素。 | | Article 4 The People’s Court may determine that a mark with certain market popularity and distinguishing the source of the goods “has certain influence” as stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition.
When determining whether a mark stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition has certain market popularity, the People’s Court shall comprehensively consider the factors such as the knowledge level of the relevant public within the territory of China, the time, region, amount and target objects for sale of the goods, the duration, degree and territorial scope of the publicity and the protection of the mark, etc. |
第五条 反不正当竞争法第六条规定的标识有下列情形之一的，人民法院应当认定其不具有区别商品来源的显著特征:
（一）商品的通用名称、图形、型号;（二）仅直接表示商品的质量、主要原料、功能、用途、重量、数量及其他特点的标识;（三）仅由商品自身的性质产生的形状，为获得技术效果而需有的商品形状以及使商品具有实质性价值的形状;（四）其他缺乏显著特征的标识。前款第一项、第二项、第四项规定的标识经过使用取得显著特征，并具有一定的市场知名度，当事人请求依据反不正当竞争法第六条规定予以保护的，人民法院应予支持。 | | Article 5 The People’s Court shall determine that any mark as stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition does not have the conspicuous characteristics for distinguishing the source of a commodity if it falls under any of the following circumstances:
(I) where the mark is the generic name, graphic or model of the commodity;
(II) where the mark only directly indicates the quality, main raw materials, function, usage, weight, quantity or other features of the commodity;(III) where the mark is the shape produced due to the nature of the commodity itself, or the shape of the commodity that should be produced for the purpose of obtaining technical effects, or the shape that produces substantial value to the commodity; and(IV) any other mark that lacks conspicuous characteristics.Where the mark as specified in Item (I), (II) or (IV) of the preceding paragraph has, upon being used, acquired conspicuous characteristics and a certain market reputation, and the party concerned applies for protection in accordance with Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition, the People’s Court shall uphold such application. |
第六条 因客观描述、说明商品而正当使用下列标识，当事人主张属于反不正当竞争法第六条规定的情形的，人民法院不予支持：
（一）含有本商品的通用名称、图形、型号；（二）直接表示商品的质量、主要原料、功能、用途、重量、数量以及其他特点；（三）含有地名。 | | Article 6 The People’s Court does not uphold such claim of the party concerned that the justifiable use of any of the following marks for the purpose of objective description or specification of a commodity falls under any of the circumstances specified in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition:
(I) where the mark contains the generic name, graphics or model of the commodity in question;
(II) where the mark directly refers to the quality, main raw materials, function, use, weight, quantity or other features of the commodity in question; and(III) where the mark contains names of places |
| 第七条 反不正当竞争法第六条规定的标识或者其显著识别部分属于商标法第十条第一款规定的不得作为商标使用的标志，当事人请求依据反不正当竞争法第六条规定予以保护的，人民法院不予支持。 | | Article 7 With regard to the marks or distinctive parts thereof as stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition that shall not be used as trademarks as stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Trademark Law, the People’s Court does not uphold the claim of the parties concerned for protection in accordance with Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
| 第八条 由经营者营业场所的装饰、营业用具的式样、营业人员的服饰等构成的具有独特风格的整体营业形象，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第六条第一项规定的“装潢”。 | | Article 8 With regard to the decoration of a business place, the pattern of business appliances, or the costume of operating personnel, etc. that constitute an overall business image with a unique style, the People’s Court may deem it as the “decoration” as stipulated in Item (I) of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
第九条 市场主体登记管理部门依法登记的企业名称，以及在中国境内进行商业使用的境外企业名称，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第六条第二项规定的“企业名称”。
有一定影响的个体工商户、农民专业合作社（联合社）以及法律、行政法规规定的其他市场主体的名称（包括简称、字号等），人民法院可以依照反不正当竞争法第六条第二项予以认定。 | | Article 9 The People’s Court may deem the name of an enterprise registered with the registration authority for market players in accordance with the law or the name of an overseas enterprise used for business within the territory of China as the “name of enterprise” as stipulated in Item (II) of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition.
The People’s Court may determine the name (including abbreviation, trade name, etc.) of an individually owned business, farmers’ specialized cooperative (cooperative union) or any other market player as prescribed by laws or administrative regulations that has certain influence in accordance with Item (II) of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
| 第十条 在中国境内将有一定影响的标识用于商品、商品包装或者容器以及商品交易文书上，或者广告宣传、展览以及其他商业活动中，用于识别商品来源的行为，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第六条规定的“使用”。 | | Article 10 Where a mark that has certain influence within the territory of China is used on commodities, commodity packages or containers and commodity trading documents, or in advertisements, exhibitions or any other commercial activities for the purpose of identifying the source of commodities, such act may be deemed by the people’s court as the “use” as stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
| 第十一条 经营者擅自使用与他人有一定影响的企业名称（包括简称、字号等）、社会组织名称（包括简称等）、姓名（包括笔名、艺名、译名等）、域名主体部分、网站名称、网页等近似的标识，引人误认为是他人商品或者与他人存在特定联系，当事人主张属于反不正当竞争法第六条第二项、第三项规定的情形的，人民法院应予支持。 | | Article 11 Where an undertaking uses, without authorization, a mark that is similar to that of others such as the name of an enterprise (including its abbreviation, trade name, etc.), the name of a social organization (including its abbreviation, etc.), a name (including pen name, stage name, translated name, etc.), the main part of a domain name, website name or webpage, which has certain influence, misleading others to mistake its commodities for those of others or to believe certain relation exists between its commodities and those of others, the People’s Court does not uphold the claim of the party concerned that it falls under the circumstances as stipulated in Items (II) and (III) of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
第十二条 人民法院认定与反不正当竞争法第六条规定的“有一定影响的”标识相同或者近似，可以参照商标相同或者近似的判断原则和方法。
反不正当竞争法第六条规定的“引人误认为是他人商品或者与他人存在特定联系”，包括误认为与他人具有商业联合、许可使用、商业冠名、广告代言等特定联系。在相同商品上使用相同或者视觉上基本无差别的商品名称、包装、装潢等标识，应当视为足以造成与他人有一定影响的标识相混淆。 | | Article 12 In determining that a mark is identical or similarity to another mark “having certain influence” as stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition, the People’s Court may refer to the principles and methods for judging the identity or similarity of trademarks.
As stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition, “misleading others to mistake its commodities for those of others or to believe certain relation exists between its commodities and those of others” shall include mistaking to have commercial association, licensing, commercial title sponsoring, advertising endorsement and other certain relations with others.
The use of identical or essentially visually indistinguishable marks such as the name, package or decoration of the commodities on the same commodities shall be deemed to be sufficient to cause confusion with others’ marks that have a certain influence. |
第十三条 经营者实施下列混淆行为之一，足以引人误认为是他人商品或者与他人存在特定联系的，人民法院可以依照反不正当竞争法第六条第四项予以认定：
（一）擅自使用反不正当竞争法第六条第一项、第二项、第三项规定以外“有一定影响的”标识；（二）将他人注册商标、未注册的驰名商标作为企业名称中的字号使用，误导公众。 | | Article 13 Where an undertaking has either of the following confusing acts, which is sufficient to cause people to mistake its commodities for others’ commodities or to believe certain relations exist between it and others, the People’s Court may determine it in accordance with Item (IV) of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition:
(I) using, without authorization, a mark that “has certain influence” other than those as stipulated in Items (I), (II) and (III) of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition; or
(II) using others’ registered trademark or unregistered well-known trademark as the trade name in its enterprise name, so as to mislead the public. |
第十四条 经营者销售带有违反反不正当竞争法第六条规定的标识的商品，引人误认为是他人商品或者与他人存在特定联系，当事人主张构成反不正当竞争法第六条规定的情形的，人民法院应予支持。
销售不知道是前款规定的侵权商品，能证明该商品是自己合法取得并说明提供者，经营者主张不承担赔偿责任的，人民法院应予支持。 | | Article 14 Where an undertaking sells any commodity with a mark in violation of Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition, thus causing others to mistake its commodities for others’ commodities or to believe certain relations exist between it and others, the People’s Court does not uphold such claim of the party concerned that it constitutes the circumstances as stipulated in Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition,.
Where an undertaking, who does not know that a commodity is an infringing commodity as stipulated in the preceding paragraph, can prove that it has obtained the commodity legally and can state the supplier, the People’s Court does not uphold such claim of the undertaking that it shall not bear the liability for compensation. |
| 第十五条 故意为他人实施混淆行为提供仓储、运输、邮寄、印制、隐匿、经营场所等便利条件，当事人请求依据民法典第一千一百六十九条第一款予以认定的，人民法院应予支持。 | | Article 15 Where a party concerned intentionally provides convenience such as warehousing, transportation, mailing, printing, concealment and place of business for others to commit confusing acts, the People’s Court does not uphold such request of the party concerned for determination in accordance with Paragraph 1, Article 1169 of the Civil Code. |
| 第十六条 经营者在商业宣传过程中，提供不真实的商品相关信息，欺骗、误导相关公众的，人民法院应当认定为反不正当竞争法第八条第一款规定的虚假的商业宣传。 | | Article 16 Where an undertaking provides false relevant information on commodities in the process of commercial promotions to cheat or mislead the relevant public, the People’s Court shall determine such acts as false commercial promotions as stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
第十七条 经营者具有下列行为之一，欺骗、误导相关公众的，人民法院可以认定为反不正当竞争法第八条第一款规定的“引人误解的商业宣传”：
（一）对商品作片面的宣传或者对比；（二）将科学上未定论的观点、现象等当作定论的事实用于商品宣传；（三）使用歧义性语言进行商业宣传；（四）其他足以引人误解的商业宣传行为。人民法院应当根据日常生活经验、相关公众一般注意力、发生误解的事实和被宣传对象的实际情况等因素，对引人误解的商业宣传行为进行认定。 | | Article 17 Where an undertaking has any of the following acts, cheating or misleading the relevant public, the People’s Court may determine such acts as “misleading commercial promotions” as stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law against Unfair Competition:
(I) carrying out one-sided promotion or comparison of the commodities;
(II) using unsure scientific viewpoints or phenomena, etc., as the facts for final conclusions in the promotion of commodities;(III) using ambiguous wordings for commercial promotion; or(IV) other acts of commercial promotion sufficient to mislead the public.The People’s Court shall determine any misleading commercial promotion act on the basis of such factors as daily life experiences, the general attention of the relevant public, the facts misunderstood and the actual situations of the objects of promotion, etc. |
| 第十八条 当事人主张经营者违反反不正当竞争法第八条第一款的规定并请求赔偿损失的，应当举证证明其因虚假或者引人误解的商业宣传行为受到损失。 | | Article 18 Where a party concerned claims that an undertaking violates the provisions of Paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law against Unfair Competition and claims compensation for its losses, it shall provide evidence to prove that its losses have been caused by the false or misleading commercial promotion act. |
| 第十九条 当事人主张经营者实施了反不正当竞争法第十一条规定的商业诋毁行为的，应当举证证明其为该商业诋毁行为的特定损害对象。 | | Article 19 Where a party concerned claims that an undertaking has committed any act of commercial defamation as stipulated in Article 11 of the Law against Unfair Competition, it shall provide evidence to prove that it is the specific damage object of such act of commercial defamation. |
| 第二十条 经营者传播他人编造的虚假信息或者误导性信息，损害竞争对手的商业信誉、商品声誉的，人民法院应当依照反不正当竞争法第十一条予以认定。 | | Article 20 Where an undertaking transmits any false or misleading information fabricated by others to damage the credit standing of its competitors or the reputation of its competitors’ commodities, the People’s Court shall determine the case in accordance with Article 11 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
第二十一条 未经其他经营者和用户同意而直接发生的目标跳转，人民法院应当认定为反不正当竞争法第十二条第二款第一项规定的“强制进行目标跳转”。
仅插入链接，目标跳转由用户触发的，人民法院应当综合考虑插入链接的具体方式、是否具有合理理由以及对用户利益和其他经营者利益的影响等因素，认定该行为是否违反反不正当竞争法第十二条第二款第一项的规定。 | | Article 21 With regard to a direct target jump without the consent of other undertakings and users, the People’s Court shall determine it as “a compulsory target jump” as stipulated in Item (I), Paragraph 2 of Article 12 of the Law against Unfair Competition.
Where only a link is inserted and the target jump is triggered by a user, the People’s Court shall determine whether such act violates Item (I), Paragraph 2 of Article 12 of the Law against Unfair Competition by comprehensively considering the specific way to insert the link, whether there is a reasonable reason, the impact on the interests of the user and other undertakings, etc. |
| 第二十二条 经营者事前未明确提示并经用户同意，以误导、欺骗、强迫用户修改、关闭、卸载等方式，恶意干扰或者破坏其他经营者合法提供的网络产品或者服务，人民法院应当依照反不正当竞争法第十二条第二款第二项予以认定。 | | Article 22 Where an undertaking maliciously interferes with or destroys the network products or services legally provided by other undertakings by ways of misleading, deceiving or forcing users to modify, close or unload them without explicit notice and the consent of users, the People’s Court shall determine the case in accordance with Item (II), Paragraph 2 of Article 12 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
| 第二十三条 对于反不正当竞争法第二条、第八条、第十一条、第十二条规定的不正当竞争行为，权利人因被侵权所受到的实际损失、侵权人因侵权所获得的利益难以确定，当事人主张依据反不正当竞争法第十七条第四款确定赔偿数额的，人民法院应予支持。 | | Article 23 With regard to an unfair competition act stipulated in Article 2, Article 8, Article 11 or Article 12 of the Law against Unfair Competition, if it is hard to determine the actual loss suffered by the right holder due to the infringement or the benefit obtained by the infringer due to the infringement, the People’s Court shall uphold the claim of the party concerned for determination of the amount of compensation in accordance with Item (IV), Article 17 of the Law against Unfair Competition. |
| 第二十四条 对于同一侵权人针对同一主体在同一时间和地域范围实施的侵权行为，人民法院已经认定侵害著作权、专利权或者注册商标专用权等并判令承担民事责任，当事人又以该行为构成不正当竞争为由请求同一侵权人承担民事责任的，人民法院不予支持。 | | Article 24 With regard to the infringing act conducted by the same infringer against the same subject at the same time in the same region, if the People’s Court has determined that copyright, patent right or exclusive right to use a registered trademark have been infringed and ordered to assume the civil liability, and the party concerned claims again for the same infringer to assume the civil liability on the ground that the act constitutes unfair competition, the People’s Court does not uphold such claim. |
| 第二十五条 依据反不正当竞争法第六条的规定，当事人主张判令被告停止使用或者变更其企业名称的诉讼请求依法应予支持的，人民法院应当判令停止使用该企业名称。 | | Article 25 In accordance with Article 6 of the Law against Unfair Competition, if the claim of the party concerned that the defendant shall be ordered to stop using or change its enterprise name shall be upheld, the People’s Court shall order the defendant to stop using the enterprise name in question. |
第二十六条 因不正当竞争行为提起的民事诉讼，由侵权行为地或者被告住所地人民法院管辖。
当事人主张仅以网络购买者可以任意选择的收货地作为侵权行为地的，人民法院不予支持。 | | Article 26 A civil lawsuit brought against unfair competition act shall be under the jurisdiction of the People’s Court of the place where the act of infringement is done or where the defendant resides.
The People’s Court does not uphold the claim of the party concerned that the place of infringement is only the place of receipt that can be arbitrarily selected by the buyer online. |
| 第二十七条 被诉不正当竞争行为发生在中华人民共和国领域外，但侵权结果发生在中华人民共和国领域内，当事人主张由该侵权结果发生地人民法院管辖的，人民法院应予支持。 | | Article 27 If the sued unfair competition act has occurred outside the People’s Republic of China, but the infringement result has occurred within the People’s Republic of China, the People’s Court shall uphold the claim of the party concerned to be governed by the People’s Court of the place where the infringement result has occurred. |
| 第二十八条 反不正当竞争法修改决定施行以后人民法院受理的不正当竞争民事案件，涉及该决定施行前发生的行为的，适用修改前的反不正当竞争法；涉及该决定施行前发生、持续到该决定施行以后的行为的，适用修改后的反不正当竞争法。 | | Article 28 For an unfair competition civil case accepted by a People’s Court after the Decision on the Amendment to the Law against Unfair Competition comes into force, if the case involves acts that occurred before the Decision comes into force, the Law against Unfair Competition before amendment shall apply; while if the case involves acts that occurred before the Decision comes into force and continues after the effectiveness of the Decision, the amended Law against Unfair Competition shall apply. |
第二十九条 本解释自2022年3月20日起施行。《最高人民法院关于审理不正当竞争民事案件应用法律若干问题的解释》（法释〔2007〕2号）同时废止。
本解释施行以后尚未终审的案件，适用本解释；施行以前已经终审的案件，不适用本解释再审。 | | Article 29 The Interpretation shall come into force on 20 March 2022, repealing simultaneously the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Cases Involving Unfair Competition (Fa Shi [2007] No.2).
The Interpretation shall apply to the cases that have not been finalized after the effectiveness hereof; and the cases that have been finalized before the effectiveness hereof shall not be governed by the Interpretation. |
