Dear Chief Justice and Judge

Zhejiang Liqun Law Firm has accepted the commission of Wang and Taizhou A Information Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Company A) to appoint us as their agent in the appeal case of copyright dispute with Shanghai Yi Technology Co., Ltd

1、 The trial of this case in the first instance fully complies with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law, and the trial did not violate legal procedures.

The appellant's statement that "the court of first instance found evidence material that plays a key role in the trial of the case during the investigation of the first instance" is all the statement of the appellant, without any evidence. The appellant did apply to the first instance court to retrieve the records of mobile customers using the software in question and the email content of the appellant during their work at Taizhou Company C to prove the completion time of the software development. However, as Taizhou Company C did not provide such information, there was no issue of presenting it to the appellant. If the appellant believes that it is necessary to obtain other so-called critical evidence from Taizhou Company C, the appellant should apply to the first instance court within the proof period, but no relevant application has been made by the appellant during the first instance proof period.

2、 The first instance found that the facts were correct, and the argument was not inappropriate. The appellant's request to confirm that they were the copyright owner of the software involved lacked evidence.

（1） The appellant Wang is the developer of the "Enterprise Short and Multimedia Message Access Platform Software" (hereinafter referred to as the "Software MAS Software") involved in the case, and the copyright of the software in question belongs to Wang.

According to the Copyright Law and the Computer Protection Regulations, unless otherwise provided by law, software copyright belongs to software developers. In response, the appellant also acknowledged in the previous trial that the software in question was developed by Wang. Although the appellant claimed that the developers of the software in question not only included Wang, but also Wan Yongbo and others, the appellant failed to provide any corresponding evidence, and even did not see any explanation from Wan Yongbo himself. The source code and relevant evidence of the software MAS we provided to the court precisely prove that Wang is the developer of the software. Therefore, unless the appellant can provide evidence to prove that the software in question complies with the provisions of Article 16 (2) of the Copyright Law and Article 13 of the Computer Protection Regulations, the copyright of the software should be presumed to belong to Wang. The reason why the copyright subject of the software MAS is registered as Company A is due to the license transfer by Wang, and Company A holds the copyright of the software completely legally.

（2） The "Enterprise Short and Multimedia Message Access Platform Software" (hereinafter referred to as "Soft MAS Software") involved in the case was not developed for the specific development goals specified by Wang in his job. The appellant claims that the software involved in the case was developed and completed by the appellant Wang at Jinhua Branch of China Mobile Communications Group Zhejiang Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jinhua Ding Company), which is not a fact.

1. Although the Labor Contract and Job Description provided by the appellant mention that the respondent Wang's job responsibilities include "designing, developing, and maintaining software products that meet functional and performance requirements", this is only a general responsibility requirement for the job position, As stipulated in the labor contract or mentioned in the job responsibilities, one of the job responsibilities of the appellant Wang is to develop software, which does not necessarily infer that he requires Wang to develop the software involved in the case. As a software technician, Wang Siping has the full right to develop software for himself that the employer does not require in his spare time. The appellant's "2011 Work Summary" submitted by Wang, although it involves the integration of software and enterprise secondary development, is also based on the respondent Wang's obligations for remote development and backend support as stipulated in the "Jinhua Software MAS Project Cooperation Framework Agreement" and the proposed "Software MAS Project Cooperation Agreement" signed with the appellant, not based on the respondent Wang's job responsibilities.

2. The appellant's provision of the "Labor Contract" only shows that the respondent Wang's workplace is a mobile company in Zhejiang Province, and it is not the appellant's location nor is it clearly designated as Jinhua Ding Company. The appellant's actual workplace is located, and the appellant has always been vague and unclear during the trial. However, the service objects of Tiantai County Rural Cooperative Bank, Linhai Citizen Card Project Group SMS Development, Taizhou Mingyuan Cosmetics, Sanmen Radio Station, lottery platform development (required by Jiaojiang Company), which are pointed out in the "other" work content of Wang's 2011 Work Summary provided by the appellant, are all Taizhou units, According to the strict geographical restrictions of the mobile company, the appellant Wang's work and service enterprises should all be located in Jinhua, and it is impossible for these units mentioned in the work summary to be involved. This indicates that the location where the appellant Wang is stationed is Taizhou C Company, not Jinhua Ding Company. In response, the two emails submitted by the appellant to the court on March 12, 2010 and April 19, 2010 (IDC customer manual of Taizhou Company C), as well as the testimony of witnesses, also confirmed that the appellant Wang's workplace is Taizhou Company C. The appellant claims that the software involved in the case was developed by the appellant Wang, who was appointed by him to China Mobile Zhejiang Co., Ltd. Jinhua Ding Company (hereinafter referred to as Jinhua Ding Company). The appellant's statement is completely unfounded and has no basis.

3. The software involved in the case was developed on July 8, 2009, before the appellant signed a cooperation agreement with Jinhua Ding Company, and was officially put into commercial use at Company C in Taizhou on December 1, 2009. Although the development completion time for the registration of the copyright certificate of the software involved was September 5, 2011, it was only for the purpose of registering the copyright owner of the software as Company A and filling in the copyright registration certificate at will (Company A was established in February 2011, so the registration time can only be after that. From the email submitted by the appellant on September 7, 2011, it can be seen that the development completion time that the appellant attempted to register was July 8, 2009), It is not the actual development time of the software. The emails we submitted on March 12, 2010, April 19, 2010 (IDC customer manual for Taizhou Company C), situation description, group SMS/MMS service usage agreement, group SMS application form, Jinhua Ding Company's 2011 soft MAS maintenance contract, and other relevant evidence can all prove the completion time of the development of the software involved.

Although Wang's "2011 Work Summary" submitted by the appellant mentioned that his work in 2011 involved the integration of software mas and enterprise secondary development, the enterprise's secondary development was based on the existence of software mas software, which also indicates that the software mas software was actually developed in 2011.

（3） The respondent has never utilized any material and technical conditions of the appellant from the beginning of developing the software MAS to the completion of the development.

According to the provisions of Article 11 (2) of the Implementation Regulations of the Copyright Law, the "material and technical conditions" in Article 16 (2) of the Copyright Law regarding work created for work refer to the funds, equipment, or materials specifically provided by the legal person or organization for citizens to complete their creations. In this case, the appellant did not provide funds, equipment, or any information to the respondent for the development of software mas. Although the appellant claimed that he paid a special fee for the development of the software MAS for the appellant Wang, and the appellant Wang provided the appellant with a receipt stating that it was the development fee for the Short Multimedia Message Access Platform (Jinhua Soft MAS). However, this fee is actually only a share of the profits obtained by the respondent from the license obtained by Jinhua Ding Company through cooperation with the appellant, and is not a dedicated development fund.

1. When the appellant signed the "Jinhua Ding Company 2011 Software MAS Maintenance Contract" with Jinhua Ding Company, the software MAS had already been developed. We have provided sufficient evidence to the court to prove that the development of the software MAS was completed in July 2009, and the appellant signed the "Maintenance Contract" with Jinhua Ding Company on December 24, 2010. The appellant Wang collected the so-called development fees after 2011, and there was no issue of paying special funds or development fees for the development of the software MAS during this period.

2. The "Cooperation Framework Agreement for Jinhua Ding Company Soft MAS Project" signed by the appellant Wang and the appellant company has clearly stipulated that both parties shall pay the appellant Wang a 3:7 fee share for the short and multimedia message project cooperation project between the appellant and Jinhua Ding company, which means that in the cooperation project between the appellant company and Jinhua company, the appellant shall pay 70% of the income share of the appellant Wang, and the appellant Wang shall provide the appellant with the short and multimedia message project Receipt of development funds for multimedia messaging access service (soft mas platform). From this, it can also be seen that the appellant's so-called development fees are actually income sharing.

In summary, we believe that the first instance court found that the facts were correct. Wang was the developer of the software involved in the case, and the copyright of the software should be presumed to belong to him. The software is now registered under the name of Company A and is a legitimate transfer by Wang. The appellant claimed that the software involved in the case was developed by Wang during his work with the appellant, using the material conditions provided by the appellant. The software developed specifically for the development goals specified in the essential work did not exist at all, and his claim that the ownership of the software involved belonged to him cannot be established. Please dismiss the appellant's appeal in accordance with the law.

Zhejiang Liqun Law Firm

Lawyers Mao Lingjian and He Meiling

April 23, 2013

1 copy of relevant legal basis attached

Attached are relevant laws and regulations:

1、 Copyright Law

Article 9 Copyright owners include:

（1） Author;

（2） Other citizens, legal persons, or other organizations who enjoy copyright in accordance with this Law.

Article 16: A work created by a citizen to complete the work tasks of a legal person or other organization is a work of employment. Except as provided in the second paragraph of this Article, the copyright shall be enjoyed by the author, but the legal person or other organization shall have the right to priority use within its business scope. Within two years after the completion of the work, without the consent of the unit, the author shall not permit a third party to use the work in the same way as the unit.

In any of the following situations, the author enjoys the right of authorship in a work created for the purpose of employment, while the other rights of the copyright are enjoyed by the legal person or other organization. The legal person or other organization may reward the author:

（1） Engineering design drawings, product design drawings, maps, computer software, and other professional works created mainly by utilizing the material and technical conditions of legal persons or other organizations, and undertaken by legal persons or other organizations;

（2） A work created for the benefit of a legal person or other organization as stipulated by laws, administrative regulations, or contractual agreements.

2、 Regulations on the Implementation of the Copyright Law

The "material and technical conditions" mentioned in Article 11, Article 16, Paragraph 2 of the regulations on work related to employment refer to the funds, equipment, or materials specifically provided by the legal person or organization for citizens to complete their creations.

Article 12: Within two years after the completion of a work for employment, with the consent of the unit, the author shall authorize a third party to use the work in the same manner as the unit, and the remuneration obtained shall be distributed between the author and the unit in accordance with the agreed proportion.

The two-year deadline for the completion of the work shall be calculated from the date on which the author delivers the work to the unit.

3、 Regulations on the Protection of Computer Software

Article 3: The meanings of the following terms in these Regulations:

（3） Software developer refers to a legal person or other organization that actually organizes the development, directly develops, and assumes responsibility for the completed software; Or a natural person who independently completes software development and assumes responsibility for the software depending on his own Conditional independence.

Article 7: Software copyright owners may register with the software registration agency recognized by the copyright administrative department of the State Council. The registration certificate issued by the software registration authority is the Prima facie of the registered items.

Article 9: Software copyright belongs to software developers, except as otherwise provided in these Regulations.

If there is no evidence to the contrary, the natural person, legal person, or other organization who signs on the software is the developer.

Article 13: If a natural person develops software during their tenure in a legal person or other organization under any of the following circumstances, the copyright of the software shall be enjoyed by the legal person or other organization, and the legal person or other organization may reward the natural person who develops the software:

（1） Software developed specifically for the development goals specified in the job;

（2） The software developed is a foreseeable or natural result of engaging in one's own work activities;

（3） Software developed primarily using material and technical conditions such as funds, specialized equipment, and unpublished specialized information from legal persons or other organizations, and held responsible by legal persons or other organizations.