When user uses the same or similar marks as other people's registered trademarks in the investment promotion and joining information published on the website, if the act constitutes trademark infringement, should the website operator bear joint liability? Recently, the case of Chengdu Roadside Catering Management Co., Ltd. v. Tianxia Business Opportunity (Beijing) Network Technology Co., Ltd.  and Chengdu Banhua Catering Management Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Banhua Company) for trademark infringement disputes, Beijing Intellectual Property’s judgment was given the answer.

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court pointed out that Tianxia Business Opportunity Company failed to fulfill the corresponding management and review obligations for Banhua Company’s registration and release of joining information. In fact, it provided convenience for Banhua Company’s infringement and constituted an act of helping others to carry out infringement. Should bear joint liability with Banhua Company.

As the publisher of the joining information involved, Banhua Company published the joining information of spicy hot on its website involved. There are many places where the alleged infringement signs "roadside" and "roadside and map" are used as signs to identify the sources of goods or services mentioned in the joining information involved. It is easy for the relevant public to misunderstand the source of goods or services or think that their sources have a specific connection with the goods or services registered with trademarks of Roadside Company, which constitutes trademark infringement. Tianxia Business Opportunity Company failed to fulfill its corresponding duty of care and failed to take necessary audit measures to audit and manage the joining information released by Banhua Company, and shall bear joint liability with Banhua Company.

In this case, the website involved is a network platform for publishing investment information. As the operator of the website, Tianxia Business Opportunity Company should have a basic understanding of the commercial franchise business, and should, according to the nature and function of the website, fulfill the corresponding duty of care, such as management and examination of the franchise information published on the website involved, especially the exclusive right to use registered trademarks and other related information. According to the documented evidence, Tianxia Business Opportunity Company failed to fulfill its corresponding duty of care and failed to take necessary audit measures to audit and manage the joining information released by Banhua Company. Tianxia Business Opportunity Company should bear joint liability with Banhua Company. The relevant disclaimer issued by Tianxia Business Opportunity Company on its website is not enough to prove that it has fulfilled its duty of care as a website operator and does not have the effect of excluding its tort liability. Moreover, the profits gained by Tianxia Business Opportunity Company from the alleged infringement in this case does not constitute a solid ground for excluding its corresponding civil liability.