Core Points - The Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court ruled in favor of Huawei in a case against Zunpai for infringing on Huawei's trade secrets, resulting in prison sentences for 14 former employees of the company, with a total fine of 13.5 million RMB [1][6] - The lead defendant, Zhang, received a 6-year prison sentence and a fine of 3 million RMB, while the other defendants received sentences ranging from 1 year to 5 years [6][8] - The court also approved a pre-litigation asset preservation request from Huawei's subsidiary, Shanghai HiSilicon, to freeze 95 million RMB in bank deposits from Zunpai and its subsidiaries [3][4] Company Background - Zunpai Communications, established for just over a year, has raised over 300 million RMB in total financing, including a Pre-A round led by notable investors such as Xiaomi Group and various venture capital firms [4] - The company previously secured nearly 100 million RMB in angel round financing in May 2021 [4] Legal Context - The case involved allegations that former executives of a rights company, including Zhang and Liu, induced former R&D personnel to join their new company and illegally obtained trade secrets related to chip technology [5][8] - The court found that the infringing chip technology had over 90% similarity to the trade secrets of the rights company, leading to significant losses for the original company [8] Xiaomi's Position - Xiaomi Group issued a statement clarifying its role as a financial investor in Zunpai, emphasizing that it does not manage or operate the company and has no involvement in any intellectual property or technology collaboration [10][11] - Xiaomi highlighted that it is one of many investors and not the largest or leading investor in Zunpai [10][11]

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court ruled on July 28 that 14 former employees of a company infringed on Huawei's trade secrets, resulting in prison sentences and fines totaling 13.5 million RMB [1] Group 1: Case Details - The case involved 14 individuals who were found guilty of stealing trade secrets related to chip technology [3] - The main suspects, including former executives Zhang and Liu, established a new tech company and lured former employees to join, encouraging them to illegally obtain proprietary information before leaving [3] - The stolen technology had over 90% similarity to the original company's trade secrets, leading to significant financial losses for the original company [3] Group 2: Sentencing Outcomes - Zhang was sentenced to 6 years in prison and fined 3 million RMB [4] - Other sentences included: - Zhou: 5 years and 1.2 million RMB fine - Liu: 4 years and 1.5 million RMB fine - Gu: 3 years and 1.2 million RMB fine - Gao: 2 years (suspended) and 800,000 RMB fine - Wang: 1 year 9 months (suspended) and 700,000 RMB fine - Zhao: 1 year (suspended) and 200,000 RMB fine - He: 1 year 6 months (suspended) and 700,000 RMB fine - Others received varying sentences and fines [4] Group 3: Company Involvement - The company involved in the case is identified as Zunpai Communications Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd., which has garnered significant media attention due to the case [5]

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court has ruled on a case involving the infringement of Huawei's trade secrets, resulting in significant penalties for former employees of a related company [1] Group 1: Legal Outcomes - A total of 14 former employees from Qianhai Si were sentenced, with 5 receiving actual prison time [1] - The main defendant, Zhang, was sentenced to 6 years in prison and fined 3 million yuan [1] - The remaining 13 employees received prison sentences ranging from 2 to 5 years, with fines varying from 200,000 to 1.5 million yuan [1]

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court has issued judicial interpretations and typical cases regarding labor disputes, specifically addressing the indiscriminate signing of non-compete agreements by companies, which impose high penalties and severely restrict workers' employment rights. This interpretation will take effect from September 1 [1]. Group 1 - To prevent the leakage of trade secrets and unfair competition, the judicial interpretation states that non-compete clauses agreed upon by employers and employees are legally valid, and employees who violate these agreements must bear legal liability [1]. - To curb the "abuse" of non-compete agreements and ensure the orderly flow of talent, the interpretation clarifies situations where non-compete clauses are invalid. Specifically, if an employee is unaware of or has not been exposed to confidential matters, the non-compete clause will not be effective [1]. - In cases where employees fall under the category of non-compete personnel, the scope, region, and duration of the non-compete clauses must correspond to the trade secrets and related confidential matters that the employee is aware of or has been exposed to; any excessive provisions will be deemed invalid [1].

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai People's Court ruled in favor of Huawei in the "Zunpai Communications infringement of Huawei's trade secrets case," marking a significant victory in Huawei's two-year intellectual property protection battle [1][5]. Group 1: Case Details - Zunpai Communications, founded in March 2021 by former Huawei executive Zhang Kun, was found guilty of systematically stealing Huawei's Wi-Fi 6 chip technology, with over 90% overlap in key technologies [1][5]. - Zhang Kun was sentenced to six years in prison and fined 3 million yuan, while 13 former Huawei employees received prison sentences ranging from 2 to 4 years [5]. - The court's decision reflects a zero-tolerance attitude towards the protection of trade secrets in China, aiming to deter malicious competition in the tech industry [5]. Group 2: Impact on Huawei - Huawei incurred direct economic losses exceeding 900 million yuan in R&D investments for Wi-Fi 6/7 technologies, with potential annual patent fee losses of 100 to 200 million USD if Zunpai's chips were mass-produced [5]. - The leak of technology has hindered Huawei's ability to negotiate in international standard discussions for Wi-Fi 7, forcing the company to disclose key patents prematurely and weakening its bargaining power [5]. Group 3: Industry Implications - The case is seen as a turning point for the semiconductor industry in China, shifting from "barbaric growth" to "compliance innovation," emphasizing the need for original technology and adherence to legal boundaries [7]. - The incident may lead venture capitalists to conduct stricter reviews of startup teams' technology sources to avoid "tainted financing" [7].

在遭电池巨头宁德时代起诉后，储能新贵海辰储能与宁德时代之间的纠纷再度升级。近日多家媒体报 道，海辰储能总裁办主任、工程部负责人冯登科因涉嫌侵犯商业秘密，已被福建宁德市警方依法采取强 制措施。据报道此事系宁德时代主动报案，宁德时代已收集完整证据交由公安机关，有接近宁德时代人 士向南都湾财社记者证实此事属实，记者也就此事致电海辰储能，相关负责人回应称对此事尚不了解。 成立5年成行业第三 涉嫌侵犯商业秘密一事发生于几年前 据知情人士透露，宁德时代并非于近期报案，冯登科涉嫌侵犯商业秘密一事发生于几年前，近期被采取 强制措施或为警方调查已有进展，相关案件还在调查当中。 天眼查信息显示，冯登科目前担任海辰储能持股90%的海辰绿能（上海）能源开发有限公司法定代表 人。有接近宁德时代人士表示，冯登科与海辰储能董事长吴祖钰原来都是宁德时代的员工，吴祖钰彼时 为冯登科的上级。 公开信息显示，海辰储能2019年创办，专注于提供以储能电池和系统为核心、覆盖全场景储能解决方案 的全球领先新能源科技公司，是全球锂离子储能电池出货量GWh级别以上中，唯一专注储能领域的企 业。 然而，这样的高管背景似乎并未为海辰储能带来与宁德时代之间的良好 ...

Core Viewpoint - The arrest of Feng Dengkai is just a chapter in the ongoing dispute between CATL and Hichern Energy, highlighting the competitive tensions in the battery storage industry [1][15]. Group 1: Company Background - Hichern Energy has rapidly ascended to become the third-largest energy storage battery manufacturer globally, surpassing competitors like BYD and CATL within just two years of mass production [4][5]. - The company is valued at 25 billion RMB before its IPO, with significant backing from investors such as Bank of China Asset Management and CICC [5]. - Hichern Energy's projected revenue for 2024 is 12.9 billion RMB, with a net profit of 288 million RMB, and its core business has a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) exceeding 160% [5]. Group 2: Legal Disputes and Allegations - CATL has initiated legal action against Hichern Energy for unfair competition, claiming that Hichern's 587Ah battery cell closely resembles CATL's patented products, with only a 4.4% deviation in energy density [5][15]. - Feng Dengkai's arrest for allegedly infringing on trade secrets is part of CATL's broader strategy to protect its intellectual property and competitive edge [5][14]. - The ongoing legal battles and Feng's arrest could significantly impact Hichern Energy's IPO process, raising concerns about internal controls and information disclosure [14][15]. Group 3: Industry Context - The energy storage battery sector is currently embroiled in a price war, putting financial pressure on companies like Hichern Energy, which has nearly 10 billion RMB in debt against 6.6 billion RMB in cash and restricted deposits [5][14]. - The rapid growth of Hichern Energy has drawn scrutiny from CATL, which has become increasingly vigilant about protecting its technological advantages and preventing talent poaching [20][21]. - The competitive landscape has shifted, with many former CATL employees now occupying key positions in rival companies, leading to heightened tensions and legal disputes [21][22].

新华财经上海7月29日电（记者杨有宗）记者29日从上海市浦东新区获悉，《浦东新区加强商业秘密保 护若干规定》（以下简称"若干规定"）对外发布，将于8月28日起正式施行。若干规定在引导企业加强 自我保护、明确商业秘密保护行政要求、强化行政保护与司法保护衔接、细化商业秘密保密要求等方面 进一步接轨国际、探索创新。 自开展全国商业秘密保护创新试点地区建设工作以来，浦东新区市场监管局、浦东新区检察院等部门立 足职能，陆续发布《浦东新区企业商业秘密保护指南》《三大先导产业商业秘密保护指南》《三大先导 产业知识产权保护指南》等指导性文件。 若干规定在商业秘密"三性"（非公知性、价值性、保密性）及侵权行为认定等方面进行了创新。比如， 在信息非公知性举证要求上，权利人若能证明其主张信息的来源（如自行研发）并采取相应保密措施， 而涉嫌侵权人无法证明其从公开渠道合法获取该信息，则认定该信息具有非公知性。 在侵权行为认定方面，有效借鉴司法实践中的"相同加接触"方法，同时增加"实质来源"的侵权情形，即 经比对，双方信息虽不相同，但权利人能证明对方信息实质来源于己方信息（如优化改进后使用），亦 构成侵权行为。 （文章来源：新华财经） ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent release of the "Draft Regulations on the Protection of Trade Secrets" is a significant step towards establishing a trade secret protection system in China, addressing challenges posed by the digital age and enhancing the protection of rights holders [1][2]. Group 1: Challenges in Protecting Trade Secrets in the Digital Age - The core elements of trade secrets include secrecy, value, and confidentiality, which face challenges in the digital era due to the electronic storage of information and the ease of data replication [2][3]. - Internet reliance increases the risk of trade secret theft through cyber threats and potential failures in confidentiality measures due to cloud service complexities [2][3]. - New technologies like artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things create novel trade secrets that existing laws struggle to protect adequately [3]. Group 2: Direction of Trade Secret Protection Rules - The draft regulations clarify the elements constituting trade secrets, including definitions of "not known to the public," "commercial value," and "taking confidentiality measures," enhancing the legal framework for protecting trade secrets [4][5]. - A systematic trade secret protection framework is proposed, shifting from reactive to proactive measures, emphasizing the roles of various stakeholders in the protection process [6][7]. - The draft regulations detail the types of actions that constitute trade secret infringement, aiming to improve the applicability and effectiveness of the law in practice [7]. Group 3: Focus Points for Trade Secret Protection in the Digital Era - There is a need to refine definitions and elements related to trade secrets to unify enforcement and judicial standards, reducing ambiguity in legal applications [8]. - The shift from "post-infringement remedies" to "prevention" is emphasized, encouraging businesses to establish robust confidentiality systems and risk management mechanisms [8][9]. - As Chinese companies expand internationally, there is an increasing demand for foreign-related trade secret protection, necessitating the development of a system aligned with international standards [9].

Group 1 - The report outlines the trends and characteristics of civil, criminal, and administrative cases related to trade secret protection in China from 2014 to 2024, highlighting the need for improved legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms [1][2][21] - Civil cases have shown a significant increase, peaking at 591 cases in 2019, while criminal cases have remained stable at an average of about 112 cases per year [1][2][19] - The majority of civil cases (over 80%) are related to trade secret infringement, with technical secret disputes being 1.7 times more prevalent than business secret disputes [1][2][28] Group 2 - The geographical distribution of cases is heavily concentrated in economically developed regions, with Guangdong, Shanghai, and Beijing accounting for 41.7% of civil cases [1][2][36] - The average trial duration for civil cases is 156 days, significantly longer than for ordinary civil cases, primarily due to the complexity of evidence [2][21] - The report indicates that the average compensation awarded in civil cases is 7.46 million yuan, but 66% of cases end in withdrawal, with statutory compensation being the norm [2][19] Group 3 - The report emphasizes the importance of strengthening preemptive measures for trade secret protection, such as improving confidentiality systems and signing non-compete agreements [2][21] - It suggests that companies should prioritize criminal reporting when evidence is sufficient, while civil litigation or administrative complaints can be pursued when evidence is lacking [2][21] - The report calls for collaboration among judicial, administrative, and corporate entities to enhance trade secret protection and proposes lowering the burden of proof and increasing compensation levels [2][21]