The Outline for Building China into a Leading Sports Power explicitly calls for strengthened intellectual property (IP) protection in the sports industry. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has designated the theme of the World Intellectual Property Day 2026 as ¡°IP and Sports: Ready, Set, Innovate!¡±

Sports are more than just competitions; they are closely intertwined with fashion, entertainment, media, health, gaming, and consumer goods. From cutting‑edge equipment and game‑changing technologies to inspiring brands and designs, IP protection powers a vibrant sports culture.

On April 22, the Shanghai Pudong New Area People¡¯s Court (hereinafter ¡°Pudong Court¡±) held a press conference to release a white paper and typical cases on judicial IP protection for the high‑quality development of the sports industry. The court summarized the new trends, characteristics, and measures in the adjudication of sports‑industry‑related IP cases over the past five years, injecting legal momentum into the high‑quality development of the sports industry.

At the press conference, Bao Yehong, Vice President of the Pudong Court, presented the white paper, and Gong Xiaoyan, Chief Judge of the Intellectual Property Tribunal, introduced ten typical cases. The press conference was hosted by Yan Jianyi, Deputy Director of the Political Department and Spokesperson of the Pudong Court. Attendees included municipal and district deputies to the People¡¯s Congress and municipal and district committee members of the CPPCC and the Pudong New Area Committee of the CPPCC, as well as journalists from central and Shanghai media outlets.

1,727 cases concluded in five years with a total disputed amount of 1.012 billion yuan

The white paper shows that from 2021 to 2025, the Pudong Court accepted 1,658 sports‑industry‑related IP cases, with a total disputed amount of 963 million yuan. It concluded 1,727 cases in total, with a total disputed amount of 1.012 billion yuan.

By cause of action, among the civil cases accepted, there were 924 copyright infringement disputes, 384 over trademark infringement, 130 over unfair competition, and 120 over IP contracts. Criminal cases mainly involved crimes such as the crime of selling goods bearing counterfeited registered trademarks and the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks.

By industry segment, the concluded cases covered various categories of the sports industry, including sports services (1,072 disputes), sports goods and related product manufacturing (653 disputes), and sports venue facilities construction (2 disputes). Cross‑border disputes also drew significant attention: over the five years, 102 such cases were concluded, involving 72 million yuan, with parties concerned from multiple countries and regions.

By method of conclusion, most sports‑industry‑related IP cases were resolved by judgment. The focal points of disputes involved the legal characterization of nested broadcasting and companion live streaming of sports events, the copyrightability of e‑sports game footage, and conflicts between registered trademarks and prior rights. These factors made adjudication significantly more challenging.

According to the white paper, sports‑industry‑related IP cases are characterized by a high proportion of copyright disputes, diverse types of trademark disputes, frequent novel competition disputes, and a concentration of international event‑related disputes.

Six measures to safeguard the high‑quality development of the sports industry

In the face of these new trends and characteristics, how can the judiciary respond precisely and effectively? The press conference announced a series of measures taken by the Pudong Court to provide judicial IP protection for the high‑quality development of the sports industry.

One, the court clarifies copyright protection rules to incentivize creation. The court has made clear that original continuous live broadcasts of sports events can be protected under the copyright law; online platforms, without authorization, may not access live broadcast channels to retransmit sports events; and the copying of e‑sports games is strictly prohibited.

Two, the court strengthens trademark infringement governance to clean up the environment for brand operation. The court has severely punished trademark infringement, reasonably determined compensatory damages, and applied punitive damages in accordance with the law. As of the end of 2025, it had rendered 46 punitive damages judgments in IP cases, with a total award of 62.78 million yuan, the highest single award being 9.95 million yuan, and the highest multiplier being five times.

Three, the court clarifies the boundaries of competitive conduct to regulate market order. The court has fully protected the prior rights of well‑known sports brands and accurately defined the boundaries of competitive interests in sports‑derived industries.

Four, the court implements the principle of equal protection to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of both Chinese and foreign enterprises. The court has equally protected the rights and interests of domestic and foreign sports‑industry entities, lawfully protected the rights of right holders such as ¡°AION,¡± ¡°Call of Duty,¡± and ¡°New Balance,¡± and properly handled IP disputes in the import and export of sports goods.

Notably, the Pudong Court also took the lead in establishing a working relationship with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Shanghai Service, the first international arbitration and mediation organization to be based in China, entrusting it with the mediation of foreign‑related IP cases and actively building a diversified mechanism for resolving foreign‑related IP disputes.

Five, the court improves diversified dispute resolution pathways and promptly applying preservation measures. The court has explored ¡°partial pre‑mediation,¡± made full use of behavioral preservation measures, and built a diversified IP dispute resolution mechanism. As of the end of 2025, it had entrusted mediation organizations with mediating 518 sports‑industry‑related IP disputes.

Six, the court conducts in‑depth industry exchanges and seminars to promote the building of a leading sports power. The court has carried out legal awareness campaigns targeting the sports industry, established the ¡°Model Law Zone¡± IP Judge Studio, strengthened IP protection education and publicity, and responded to the IP protection needs of sports enterprises.

Ten typical cases released to set an example and provide guidance

The ten typical cases released at the press conference focus on areas such as sports events, e‑sports, sports brands, sports variety shows. Several of them are the first of their kind in the country or in Shanghai, setting boundaries and clarifying rules for the orderly development of the industry, and providing strong judicial guidance.

In one pre‑litigation behavioral preservation application concerning a major sports event, during the Winter Olympics, the respondent used its mobile app to broadcast CCTV‑5+ and other TV channels, providing the public with online access to event coverage. The Pudong Court, after review, found that the event coverage was highly time‑sensitive and had significant economic value, and promptly issued an order requiring the respondent to immediately stop providing coverage of the Beijing Winter Olympics. This case created a judicial model for expedited review of major international sports events and efficient, full‑cycle protection of event IP, and was cited in the Supreme People¡¯s Court¡¯s work report.

In the country¡¯s first unfair competition dispute involving commercial e‑sports boosting, the defendant operated Dailianbang, a game boosting app, to provide commercial boosting services to users, including minors. The Pudong Court held that this conduct constituted unfair competition for undermining the fair competition mechanism and interfering with the real‑name registration policy and the anti‑addiction system for minors. It thus ordered the defendant to cease the infringement and pay damages. The case clarified the legal boundary between personal recreational boosting and platform‑based commercial boosting, provided a judicial basis for cracking down on match‑fixing in professional competitions, and was selected as a typical case on antitrust and unfair competition by the People¡¯s Court Case Database.

In a criminal case involving the sale of goods bearing counterfeited registered trademarks, the defendants sold counterfeit golf clubs bearing well‑known brands such as ¡°HONMA,¡± ¡°XXIO,¡± and ¡°PING¡± both domestically and overseas through online platforms, with sales amounting to over six million yuan. The Pudong Court imposed custodial sentences on all principals, ranging from two years and four months to four years, and fines ranging from 300,000 to three million yuan, severely punishing sports‑industry‑related IP crimes and effectively maintaining order in the sports goods market.

After the press conference, a seminar on cutting‑edge issues in judicial IP protection for the sports industry was held, with representatives from legal practice, academia, and the industry discussing topics such as the dissemination of sports events and IP protection, new digital sports business forms, and new judicial responses to IP protection.

Comments from Deputies and Committee Members

Hong Chengdong, Deputy to the Shanghai Municipal People¡¯s Congress

By aligning with the theme of World Intellectual Property Day 2026 and releasing a white paper and typical cases on judicial IP protection for the high‑quality development of the sports industry, the Pudong Court has demonstrated its proactive role in serving national strategies and promoting the construction of Shanghai as a world‑renowned sports city, fully showcasing the international vision and sense of responsibility of a court in a leading area. We look forward to seeing more efficient judicial adjudication and cutting‑edge rule‑setting that inject new momentum into the innovative development of the sports industry.

Chen Yin, Deputy to the Pudong New Area People¡¯s Congress

By focusing on the sports industry and releasing a white paper and typical cases on judicial IP protection for its high‑quality development, the Pudong Court has accurately responded to the needs of the times and helped drive industry innovation. Whether it is copyright protection for event broadcasts or resolution of trademark disputes in international events, the court has made rulings in accordance with the law while striking a balance between industry development and the public interest, thereby building a solid legal foundation for the high‑quality development of the sports industry. We hope the court will continue to deepen its judicial IP adjudication, refine its judgment standards, and extend its judicial functions, providing even stronger judicial protection to help the sports industry achieve steady and long‑term development.

Zhu Xiaoqing, Member of the CPPCC Pudong New Area Committee

The white paper released today by the Pudong Court systematically summarizes the adjudication of sports‑industry‑related IP cases, with solid data, precisely identified issues, and practical measures. The typical cases cover core areas such as event broadcasting, sports trademarks, and digital sports, with clear adjudicative rules and a strong orientation, responding to the urgent need for the rule of law in the high‑quality development of the sports industry and providing clear judicial guidance for event operations, brand protection, and digital sports innovation. We expect to see more forward‑looking research, strengthened collaborative governance, and extended judicial services in the court to provide even stronger judicial protection for the high‑quality development of the sports industry.

Shanghai Pudong New Area People¡¯s Court: White Paper on Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property to Support High-Quality Development of the Sports Industry (2021-2025).pdf

Shanghai Pudong New Area People¡¯s Court: Typical Cases on Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property to Support High-Quality Development of the Sports Industry.pdf