The "Coral Bug QQ" copyright infringement case was a key case closely watched by the National Copyright Bureau and one of the current hot topics. Recently, the author of "Coral Bug QQ," Chen Shoufu, was sentenced to three years in prison and fined 1.2 million yuan, drawing attention from the intellectual property community, legal circles, and a large number of internet users. Some believe that the author profited from piracy and deserved punishment; others think that since it wasn't as malicious as the "Panda Burning Incense" virus, a three-year sentence is too severe. In fact, regarding this case, the law has its own impartial judgment, and we don’t need to argue about it. The severity of the sentence has a certain basis—can disputes really determine Chen Shoufu's sentence?
Lawyers believe that for a crime of copyright infringement to be constituted, three conditions must be met: first, there must be an intention to profit; second, the act must be unauthorized infringement; third, it must reach a certain level of criminal circumstances. In Chen Shoufu's case, all three conditions were met, so it can be said he deserved his punishment.
When Chen Shoufu first launched Coral Bug QQ, there was nothing wrong with it—it was indeed a cleaning software that could block ads and prevent malicious software, offering no profit and being originally well-intentioned. However, when he began making economic gains through bundled software and plugins, the nature changed. Moreover, these economic benefits infringed on Tencent’s interests, thus constituting a copyright infringement crime. Furthermore, Coral Bug had a function to display the IP address of the other party, which might also涉嫌 infringe on others' privacy rights. Chen Shoufu's illegal earnings exceeded one million yuan, nearly ten times the minimum limit defined by law as an especially serious circumstance.
From this perspective, it is an established fact that he committed a crime, beyond question. Moreover, some lawyers have pointed out that the case has already been lightly sentenced, clearly showing that leniency has been considered for the offender. As netizens have said, both emotions and the value of his software development have been taken into account. Deciding a case cannot be based on emotions but must adhere to "facts as guidelines and laws as the basis." Emotional bias should never take precedence.
For Coral Bug, as an external plugin that blocked QQ advertisements, illegally modified QQ software functions, and installed third-party rogue software, it caused significant losses to users and posed harm to others. Its resolution cannot allow others to see opportunities for similar actions or provide chances for piracy.
Purifying the network environment is everyone's duty without excuse, and more so the responsibility of legal professionals. If such cases are ignored or principles abandoned due to emotional factors, it would be unfair to everyone and dangerous to society, undermining the dignity of the law. Therefore, the author believes there should be no controversy about this matter, and instead, applause is deserved. We cannot let personal feelings hinder the law or others. We should trust the law, which will make an impartial judgment.