Beijing IPR Court First Supports Time-Based Billing for Attorney Fees in IPR Cases

(By Wang Ting)Recently the court has approved of the attorney fee up to 1 million RMB in an IPR case, and it is the first time that the court has applied time-based billing to calculate such attorney fee. Meanwhile in this case, the court has also confirmed the principles of determining the attorney fee on three items. Today, we are going to go through this case and discuss about the reasons why the court has fully approved of the attorney fee this time.

Case Introduction

Plaintiff: Beijing Watchdata Technologies Co., Ltd (the “Watchdata”)


Is a Notarization Made under False Pretenses for the Purpose of Evidence Collecting Valid in China?

(By  Luo Yanjie) In a civil lawsuit, the collecting of evidence for the purpose of notarization is quite common. However, during the process of collecting evidence that concerns the selling of infringing goods, the rights holders or their attorneys typically utilize a system of collection in which they set up a “customer” to purchase the infringing product as evidence of infringement. So the question is, should evidence collected in this manner be considered legally effective for the purposes of a lawsuit for infringement or unfair trade practice? For our understanding on the issue, and our experience in this decidedly complicated process, we would like to share with our readers today’s post concerning our opinions on the issue:


Does Running Game Cheating Programs Violate the Criminal Law in the United States?

—Day four of the visit to the United States

(By You Yunting) Beginning at the end of this March, on the invitation of the US government, the writer visited America with other Chinese legal experts with the goal of understanding its IPR system. On the fourth day, the writer visited the US Justice Department’s Bureau of Computer Crimes and IPR, the Department of Homeland Security’s IPR Coordination Center, and the American Chamber of Commerce. The following is the brief record of the writer’s experiences that day:


Why China Is Not Among Top 20 Countries of Pirated Music Download?

By You Yunting

Musicmetric, a website in USA, published the top 20 countries of pirated music download, yet to most ones’ astonishment, China is not found on the tally, who is commonly accused of granting least protection on IPR. Then what contributes to the surprising result? In today’s post, you could find our answer to it.

I. Most online music services are using the copyrighted ones

Unlike chargeable music download in iTunes or through P2P in USA, most users in China tend to get their free music by search engine, or download or listen to them by music software. The most popular music service now in China is from Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) and Tencent (SEHK: 700), whose music library is mostly licensed by the main recorders around the world.


Increased Penalty for the IPR Protection after China Criminal Law Revision

As reported, Mr. Jiang Zengwei, the deputy minister of China Commerce Ministry, replied on the press conference on 13th, December that China will enhance the strength of the IPR infringement punishment from 6 aspects, including the completion on the civil evidence rule and increasing the penalty sum.

The specific measures include to research the revision on the criminal law for the strengthened deterrence with more scientific description on the crime; to draft the current effective measures into the judicial interpretation; to increase the penalty sum as times of the infringing products’ value; to complete the civil evidence rule; to research the increase on compensation; to research the application conditions for the great amount, serious consequence and serious circumstance in the criminal law for the more feasibility of the law.