2021年11月14日上午，由浙江利群律师事务所知识产权部主办的第二期模拟法庭活动如期举行，利群所知识产权部全体成员、对知识产权感兴趣的律师及实习律师到场观摩。

案件背景

外研社、外研通公司诉温州某公司、深圳某公司侵害复制权、发行权、信息网络传播权纠纷案件。最终一审法院判决：生产商（深圳某公司）生产的“A6”点读笔侵害了外研社、外研通公司的信息网络传播权；销售商（温州某公司）销售的“Q7”点读笔侵害了外研社、外研通公司的复制权、发行权；生产商（深圳某公司）赔偿X万元；销售商（温州某公司）赔偿X万元。判决后，原、被告三方均不服一审判决，上诉至二审法庭。

活动上，知识产权部的几位律师通过对审判长、审判员、书记员、上诉人等角色扮演，围绕上述案情，模拟了二审庭审活动。

审判长：陈俊秀律师审判员：詹韩康律师、金海波律师书记员：实习律师汪文琦上诉人（原审原告外研社、外研通公司的代理律师）：钟瑶瑶律师上诉人（原审被告深圳某公司）：李笑笑律师上诉人（原审被告温州某公司）：李雅倩律师案 由：侵害作品复制权、发行权、信息网络传播权纠纷

模拟庭审

这一个多小时精彩纷呈的模拟庭审，三方围绕法官归纳的争议焦点，结合在案证据充分的发表了各自观点，法官步步深入、层层推进法庭调查，上诉人外研社、外研通公司的代理律师钟瑶瑶向法官充分地展示了复制权、发行权、信息网络传播权案件涉及的证据及事实认定、法律适用等问题。

评委点评

评 委：台州市律师协会知识产权专业委员会主任、利群所副主任毛灵见律师，台州市律师协会知识产权专业委员会委员、利群所知识产权部主任王健律师 。

在最后评委点评环节中，毛灵见律师和王健律师结合案情对代理律师在庭审过程中的表现进行点评，并对今后代理知识产权案件的方式、方法提出意见和建议。与会律师纷纷表示，通过观摩模拟法庭，学习掌握了知识产权案件的规范代理方式，有助于自身专业能力的提升，受益匪浅。

“辩一题而有知，论纵横而明志”，模拟法庭是利群所培养和锻炼青年律师并使之快速提高综合能力的重要方式之一。随着律师队伍逐渐壮大，律所将开展更多适合所内青年律师提升自我的培训活动，为青年律师的成长、发展搭建更广阔的舞台。

On the morning of November 14, 2021, the second phase of the Moot court activity hosted by the Intellectual Property Department of Zhejiang Liqun Law Firm was held as scheduled, with all members of the Intellectual Property Department of Liqun Law Firm, lawyers interested in intellectual property and trainee lawyers present.

Background of the case

A dispute case involving infringement of reproduction rights, distribution rights, and information network dissemination rights by a company in Wenzhou and Shenzhen, filed by FLTRP and FLYTC. The final first instance court ruled that the "A6" point reading pen produced by the manufacturer (a company in Shenzhen) infringed on the information network dissemination rights of FLTRP and FLTRT; The "Q7" point reading pen sold by a seller (a company in Wenzhou) infringes on the reproduction and distribution rights of FLTRP and FLTRT; The manufacturer (a company in Shenzhen) shall compensate X million yuan; The seller (a company in Wenzhou) shall compensate X million yuan. After the judgment, both the plaintiff and the defendant refused to accept the first instance judgment and appealed to the second instance court.

At the event, several lawyers from the Intellectual Property Department simulated the second instance trial by playing the roles of the presiding judge, judge, clerk, appellant, and others around the above case.

Judge: Lawyer Chen Junxiu Judge: Lawyer Zhan Hankang, Lawyer Jin Haibo Clerk: Intern Lawyer Wang Wenqi Appellant (original plaintiff FLTRP, acting lawyer for FLTRT): Lawyer Zhong Yaoyao Appellant (original defendant Shenzhen company): Lawyer Li Xiaoxiao Appellant (original defendant Wenzhou company): Lawyer Li Yaqian Cause of action: Dispute over infringement of work reproduction rights, distribution rights, and information network dissemination rights

Mock trial

In this more than an hour long and exciting simulated trial, the three parties expressed their respective opinions around the controversial focus summarized by the judge, combined with sufficient evidence in the case. The judge delved deeper and advanced the court investigation layer by layer. Zhong Yaoyao, the lawyer representing the appellant FLTRP and FLTRT, fully demonstrated to the court the evidence, factual determination, and legal application issues involved in the case of reproduction rights, distribution rights, and information network dissemination rights.

Slow Ride

Judges: Lawyer Mao Lingjian, Director of the Intellectual Property Professional Committee of the Taizhou Lawyers Association and Deputy Director of Liqun Institute, and Lawyer Wang Jian, Member of the Intellectual Property Professional Committee of the Taizhou Lawyers Association and Director of the Intellectual Property Department of Liqun Institute.

In the final evaluation session of the judges, Lawyer Mao Lingjian and Lawyer Wang Jian evaluated the performance of the acting lawyer in the trial process based on the case situation, and provided opinions and suggestions on the ways and methods of representing intellectual property cases in the future. The lawyers attending the meeting said that they learned and mastered the standardized agency mode of intellectual property cases by observing the Moot court, which helped to improve their professional ability and benefited a lot.

Moot court is one of the important ways for Liqun to train and train young lawyers and make them improve their comprehensive ability rapidly. As the legal team gradually grows, the law firm will carry out more training activities suitable for young lawyers within the firm to enhance themselves, building a broader stage for the growth and development of young lawyers.