Galaxy linkage patent

There is a big difference between the plaintiff company and WeChat in the principle of QR code payment, so their operation methods are completely different, and there is no infringement. Moreover, he asked for a considerable amount of compensation in court, so there is some doubt about the amount of compensation, because WeChat is now a payment method that we often use in our daily life.

Wechat payment system only provides users with payment channels, and the QR code does not contain the entity information of the merchant, which belongs to the "single-field QR code". The patent owned by the plaintiff is a "multi-domain QR code", and its QR code will contain specific business information, which is different from the operating mode of WeChat payment.

The scope of protection of the patent right for invention or utility model shall be subject to the contents of its claims. It can be seen from the patent name and the trial site of Micro Card Times Company and Galaxy Linkage Company that the patent contains merchant information and is highly targeted and personalized. However, the WeChat payment system only provides payment channels and has nothing to do with merchant information. Therefore, the two designs have different concepts and operation modes.

Wechat payment has spread to people's daily lives, and the case has attracted attention. According to relevant reports, as of the first quarter of this year, the average daily total transaction volume of WeChat payment exceeded 654.38 billion times. The usage of WeChat payment is still quite large.

The micro-card era responded that in the process of generating payment links, it is bound to involve the specific identification of merchants. Therefore, in this case, both Tencent and Vanke Eslite have torts and should bear joint and several liability for compensation. There must be a reasonable explanation after the public says that the public is right and the old woman says that the old woman is right.