Chinese Court decision strongly reinforces copyright secondary liability

South Korean broadcaster MBC has won a long-running copyright case against China’s video platform Bilibili.  MBS is one of the leading Korean TV and radio broadcasters and Bilibili is often called the ‘Chinese YouTube’. The case in the Jiangsu High People’s Court led to a final ruling that increased damages and holds the Chinese video platform legally responsible for piracy hosted via user uploads.

The dispute started back to 2021, when MBC discovered that large volumes of its original programmes were being shared on Bilibili without authorisation. According to MBC, the unauthorised distribution was occurring at scale through user-generated content, with numerous clips circulating for extended periods. MBC filed suit in a Chinese court seeking damages and arguing that the platform was benefiting from the availability and visibility of pirated content. In the first trial, the court found infringement and ruled in MBC’s favour. However, MBC appealed, contending that the damages awarded did not reflect the commercial value of its programmes or the platform’s role in enabling piracy. The broadcaster argued that the case was not simply about isolated uploads by individual users, but about a broader dissemination mechanism in which the platform’s design and operations played a meaningful part.

The court found Bilibili liable for contributory infringement, saying it knew or should have known MBC programmes were being widely pirated and failed to take adequate measures to remove the illegal content. There was no user generated content ‘UGC’ safe harbour excuse because Bilibili’s recommendation algorithms and channel/category curation helped surface and spread infringing clips, so the court said it could not present itself as a neutral intermediary. Bilibili had failed to take appropriate action despite knowing that pirated content was spreading widely and could not argue that it was simply UGC when they were driving distribution. Damages compensation to MBC was significantly raised compared with the first-instance decision.

This is a strong and clear judicial statement on ISP copyright liability in China, and creates greater risk for tech company content platforms to manage their content better.  They cannot argue passive hosting while at the same time having curation mechanisms which actively contribute to the spread of infringing material.