Baker & McKenzie Scores Major IP Victory for Porsche

When a sports car tuning company built a showroom that was a copy of the Porsche Center in Beijing, company executives were not pleased. The showroom, located just a few miles from Porsche’s, had the same curved façade, unique glass pattern and stylized floor-to-ceiling glass entrance.

“Porsche was extraordinarily upset about this,” Baker & McKenzie partner Scott Palmer says. “They came to us and said, ‘We really want this to stop.’”

In 1999, Porsche created a uniform design for its sports car centers around the world, including the one in Beijing, completed in 2003.

Techart, a German company that specializes in tuning Porsche cars, soon followed Porsche to China, and its local agent (Techart Beijing) built a showroom in Beijing in 2005 that very closely resembled the nearby Porsche Center. Under Baker & McKenzie’s advisement, Porsche registered copyright in the building design for its local Porsche Center with the National Copyright Administration in Beijing and filed suit against Techart in the Beijing 2nd Intermediate People’s Court.

In December 2007, the court ruled the Porsche Center in Beijing constituted a unique architectural work protectable under PRC law, and that Techart Beijing had infringed Porsche’s copyright. The court ordered Techart Beijing to alter the appearance of its building so that it no longer constituted a substantial copy of Porsche’s building design.

It was the first time a Chinese court had clearly defined the scope of copyright protection for architectural designs, and the first case in which a PRC court issued an order to an infringer to change the appearance of an existing structure.

“Few courts are willing to entertain this kind of injunction because of the practicalities of enforcement,” says Palmer, who led the Firm’s legal team in Beijing with partner Chris Smith and associate Alice Hu.

In its decision, the court made it clear the copyright protection was limited to the structure itself and not ancillary features like the color of the building or types of construction materials — laying out clear parameters for what elements are protected. By ordering Beijing Techart to alter its building, the court also established appropriate remedies for this type of copyright infringement.

When Beijing Techart appealed to the Supreme People’s Court, the high court not only upheld the lower court’s ruling, but named it China’s most influential IP case of 2008 — one that’s already being taught in law schools throughout China.

Although court decisions in China aren’t binding on lower courts like in common law jurisdictions such as the US, high-profile decisions often serve as guidelines for subsequent courts handling similar legal issues.

“This is as close to precedent as you’re going to get,” Palmer says. “If you’re an IP lawyer in China advising a client on what’s protected and how to frame your arguments, this is the case you’d turn to.”