China picture book story explanation video

1. How does WeChat publish a picture book story with audio and video on WeChat official account?

Use the micro-scene function of the development mode, or make a micro-website with music pictures yourself, and guide users to click on it by "reading the original".

Who has a simple video of the story of primary school English picture books, and the content is best repeated? Ask for video.

In April, there were few idle people in the countryside, and sericulture was planted in the fields.

Iii. The vegetable garden has become a good picture book.

A Garden of Vegetables Becomes Better is a picture book compiled by northern nursery rhymes. It's about going east after leaving the city gate. After the peasants left, a garden of vegetables became better, and they went to war. When the farmers came back, the vegetables in the garden were ripe. Through humorous exaggeration and catchy nursery rhymes, the book interprets a vivid story in a vegetable garden and gives children endless imagination.

The language of this book is humorous, for example, the green stems and leaves of shallots grow straight like a silver gun. The leaves of leek are long, narrow and flat, like two sharp edges. Garlic is cracked when cooked, peppers are red, eggplant is purple and round. When I write about lotus root, I don't mean that it grows in the soil, but that it becomes a general who fled and got into the mud.

Ⅳ What software can record picture book videos?

You search the recording in the software. You can find a lot of software.

Ⅳ I am so happy about the picture book story. Where there is a video that tells a story with sound, it is best to have a corresponding picture.

Please refer to the picture book online forum.

ⅵ Duckling with Wolf Mother Picture Book Lecture Video.

Have a small party and let the children talk about their mother's love and their feelings. Let's write a card for their mother together. How sweet!

ⅶ Is there a video of a picture book story? Where should I find it?

There is no video in the picture book story. The point is, what do you need the video for? Do a lesson plan? Show it to your children?

ⅷ picture book, don't lose your temper, talk about the video.

Children's anger may be caused by their parents. He subconsciously thinks that losing his temper can make people meet his requirements. Therefore, when a child loses his temper, don't blindly agree to his request. When he is calm, reason with him and speak softly. Adults should not lose their temper. You can ignore him when he loses his temper, but you can't lose your temper with him, it will affect him. Children need their parents' patience.

Picture book, Elephant Back: The Day of Departure This is a very touching picture book in Japan. You can check it online. It's about the elephant father's deep love for his family, and it's warm to watch his family go to heaven before and after.

Hans' Ali series is also good, which implies some truth. Needless to say, Jimmy is a famous picture book, but children will read it a little deeply and the picture is more abstract.

Dad, who is very angry now, can show his children around and see what parents and themselves do when other children are crying and losing their temper, which is of educational significance to both parents and children.

ⅸ Draw a picture book. Can you still call yourself the editor-in-chief after making a video?

If you create the characters in it, you can say that you are the editor in chief.

ⅹ Using classic picture books to develop videos, is it infringement?

Generally speaking, when judging patent infringement, the following main principles should be applied:

I. The principle of universal coverage

The principle of universal application is one of the most basic principles, and it is also the first principle to judge patent infringement.

Comprehensive coverage means that the accused infringer (product or method) reproduces all the necessary technical features of the technical scheme recorded in the patent claim, and the accused infringer (product or method) corresponds to and is the same as all the necessary technical features recorded in the patent independent claim. The principle of universal coverage, that is, the principle of covering all technical features or the principle of literal infringement. If the technical features of the object (product or method) accused of infringement include all the necessary technical features recorded in the claim, it belongs to the protection scope of the patent right. That is, if the technical characteristics of the accused infringing product cover all the necessary technical characteristics of the infringed patented technology, the infringement can be established and the infringer needs to bear the tort liability. On the other hand, if the necessary technical features of the object accused of infringement do not completely cover all the necessary technical features of the object accused of infringement, that is, one or more of the necessary technical features of the object accused of infringement are lacking compared with the patented technical features, the infringement is not established.

In the following cases, the alleged infringement is considered to completely cover the patent claim.

1. Literal infringement. That is to say, from the literal analysis and comparison, it can be concluded that the technical characteristics of the accused infringer are the same as the necessary characteristics of the patent, and even the written expression of the technical characteristics is the same. 2. The patent claim uses the superordinate concept, and the structure disclosed by the accused infringer belongs to a specific concept in the superordinate concept. In this case, the principle of universal coverage is applied, and the alleged infringer infringes.

3. The technical features of the accused infringer are more than the necessary technical features of the patent, that is to say, compared with the patent claim, the technical features of the accused infringer not only include all the features of the patent claim, but also increase the features. This situation still belongs to infringement, because the principle of universal application means that as long as the accused infringer has all the characteristics of the patent claim, it belongs to infringement, regardless of whether the accused infringer has more characteristics than the claim.

In practice, the public may not understand this, and feel that the accused infringer has more features than the claim, and its performance may be better than the patented product. Why should it be identified as infringement? This is because patents protect intellectual achievements. If the later product is improved on the basis of the patented product, although its performance may be better than that of the patented product, it is necessary to obtain the permission of others because it uses the patents and intellectual achievements of others, otherwise it is infringement.

If the technical features of the object accused of infringement are less than one or more necessary technical features of the patent, it does not constitute infringement. Because the technical scheme composed of the necessary technical features in the claim is an inseparable whole, only when all the necessary technical features in the independent claim are used can it constitute infringement. For example, the realization of the scheme in the independent claim requires four devices or steps: A, B, C and D, while the accused infringement scheme only uses three devices or steps, which indicates that the accused infringement scheme uses fewer technical features to achieve the purpose and effect of the patented technology. This is a technological innovation, which is more advanced than the patented technology and obviously cannot be regarded as infringement.

As the means of patent infringement are becoming more and more complicated and secretive, as far as the practice of China courts is concerned, there are fewer and fewer cases in which the alleged infringement is determined only by the principle of universal application. Therefore, when applying the principle of universal application to determine that the accused infringing object does not constitute patent infringement, we should continue to apply the principle of equivalence to determine infringement.

Second, the principle of reciprocity.

The principle of "equivalence" is an important principle in judging patent infringement, and it is also the most widely used principle by courts in judging patent infringement. It means that one or more technical features of the accused infringing object (product or method) are literally different from those protected by the patent independent claim, but they can be identified as the same technical features after analysis. In this case, it should be considered that the object (product or method) accused of infringement belongs to the scope of patent protection.

1853 Weinan v Denmark is one of the earliest cases in the United States to determine patent infringement by applying the principle of equivalence. Wei Nan designed a conical carriage which can evenly distribute pressure, and the carriage was patented. Denmark also designed a carriage with an octagonal upper part and a pyramid lower part. Weinan v Denmark. The court of first instance held that the car stipulated in Weinan's patent claim was conical, but the car designed by Denmark was not conical, so the infringement was not established. The Supreme Court of the United States held that the patentee could not create an absolute cone; If the shape of the defendant's carriage is close enough to a cone, and its function and effect are basically the same as that of the patent, the court shall hold that the patent infringement is established. In view of the special circumstances of this case, the court should take special measures to protect the interests of the patentee, which is later called the principle of equivalence.

The principle of equivalence has been applied in the practice of patent infringement litigation in China for a long time, but it was not until 200 1 that the Supreme People's Court made a clear stipulation on the principle of equivalence for the first time in Several Provisions on Applicable Legal Issues in the Trial of Patent Disputes [(200 1) Law Interpretation No.21]. Article 17 of this regulation: "The scope of protection of the patent right for invention or utility model mentioned in the first paragraph of Article 56 of the Patent Law shall be subject to the contents of the patent claim, and the description and drawings can be used to interpret the patent right", which means that the scope of protection of the patent right shall be subject to the scope determined by the necessary technical features clearly recorded in the patent claim, including the scope determined by the features equivalent to the necessary technical features. This article clearly stipulates that the scope of protection applicable to patent infringement includes not only the technical features recorded in the patent claim, but also the technical features equivalent to those recorded in the claim, that is, equivalent features. "Equivalent features", also known as equivalents, refer to features that achieve basically the same functions and effects as the recorded technical features by basically the same means and can be associated by ordinary technicians in this field without creative labor.

The technical features that meet the following two conditions in the alleged infringement are the equivalent features of the corresponding technical features in the claim:

1. Compared with the corresponding technical features in the claim, the technical features of the alleged infringement have basically the same functions and the same effects;

2. For ordinary technical personnel in the field of this patent, technical features that can be associated without creative labor by reading the patent claims and specifications.

At the same time, when applying this principle, we should also pay attention to the following points:

1. Equivalent substitution includes both the distinguishing technical features in the replacement claim and the technical features in the preface of the replacement claim. Because they are all necessary technical features for inventive purposes.

2. The principle of equivalence is applied to determine whether the specific technical features in the accused infringer (product or method) are equivalent to the corresponding necessary technical features in the patent independent claim, but not whether the overall technical scheme of the accused infringer (product or method) is equivalent to the technical scheme defined in the independent claim.

3. The determination of equivalent infringement should be based on the professional knowledge level of ordinary technicians in the patent field, not the professional knowledge level of senior technical experts in this field.

4. Determination is equivalent to infringement. For groundbreaking major invention patents, the scope of equivalent protection can be appropriately relaxed; For combined inventions or selective inventions, the scope of equivalent protection can be strictly determined.

5. To judge whether the technical features in the object (product or method) accused of infringement are equivalent to those in the independent patent claim, the time when the infringement occurred should be taken as the boundary, not the date of patent application or the date of patent publication.

6. For the intentional omission of some necessary technical features in the claim, which makes its technical scheme inferior to the patented technical scheme in performance and effect, and this deteriorated technical scheme is obviously caused by the omission of necessary technical features, the principle of equivalence shall be applied and deemed to constitute patent infringement.

The principle of reciprocity cannot be applied mechanically, especially in the following two cases:

1. Free existing technology, also known as known technology. In the public domain, anyone has the right to use known technology for free.

It cannot be considered that the use of well-known technology will cause equivalent infringement on others' patents.

2. In the patent application, the matters that the patentee intends to exclude should be applied first, that is, the principle of estoppel.

In the above two cases, if the principle of equivalence is applied, it will cause excessive protection to the obligee. It will bring unexpected adverse consequences to the public and damage the stability of the law. This completely violates the original intention of the principle of reciprocity.

In short, the principle of equivalence is established in the technical judgment of patent infringement, and its purpose is to prevent the infringer from taking obvious equivalent elements or steps to replace the technical features in the patent claim, so as to avoid literal direct infringement and achieve the purpose of evading responsibility. However, due to the diversity and complexity of infringement methods, we should compare and judge carefully in specific applications.