Patent Law Archives - Bridge IP Law Commentary

Factors that Businesses Should Consider When Formulating Service Invention Bonus and Reward Policies

Posted on March 17, 2022 by yytbest

(By Gao Shaoyi and Li Rong) The Patent Law, the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law and other relevant laws are all guidelines as to how to reward and pay the rewards for patents. In Patent Law, businesses are not only entitled but also obligated to pay rewards for patents. Considering these legal provisions, many businesses have made agreements with relevant right holders or formulated patent reward policies according to their industry and regional conditions. Businesses need to follow the principle of “acting upon agreement or in case of no agreement, law” and reasonably formulate their own patent reward policies by reference to statutory standards. In this article we would like to deal with general, key and practical issues connected with service invention reward cases in recent years we searched.

The Impact of the Hague Agreement on the Layout of Chinese Enterprise Design Patents

Posted on March 17, 2022 by yytbest

(By Ye Sushuo) On February 5, 2022, World Intellectual Property Organization announced that China has joined the Hague System for the International Registration of Industrial Designs. China became the 68th contracting party to the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement (1999) and the 77th member of the Hague Union. The number of design applications in China has ranked first in the world in recent years. In 2017, the number of design patent applications accepted in China was 629,000, in 2018 it was 709,000, in 2019 it was 712,000, and in 2020 it was 771,000, showing an upward trend year by year. The new “Patent Law” that has come into effect has also pushed China’s design protection to a higher level. Under the Hague Agreement, enterprises should also pay more attention to the layout of design patents.

China Laws and Regulations Update in October 2020

Posted on December 1, 2020 by yytbest

1.Patent Law of China (Revised)

Promulgated by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress

Promulgation date: 19 October 2020

Implementation date: 1 June 2021

Document number: No.55 Chinese President Order

The revised law mainly deals with the following matters.

I.Increase of the cost of infringement, making infringers pay high prices

The revised law creates rules on punitive damages, under which in serious cases of patent right infringement, the court can decide the amount of damages at one to five times an amount calculated on the basis of patent holder’s loss, infringer’s benefits and times the patent license fee. In addition, it increases the upper limit of statutory damages to RMB 5 million and their lower limit to RMB 30 thousand. To solve evidence collection problems in patent cases, the revised patent law further improves evidence rules and provides that if the patent holder has make greatest possible efforts to collect evidence and most of books and materials connected with infringement are controlled by the infringer, the court can order the infringer to present such books and materials and reduce the patent holder’s burden of proof.

Introduction to Protection of New Varieties of Plants in China

Posted on August 14, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting)Introduction to the Case:

Appellant (Defendant at first instance): Jiangsu Xunong Seeds Science and Technology Co., Ltd (the “Xunong”)

Respondent (Plaintiff at first instance): Tianjin Tianlong Seeds Science and Technology Co., Ltd (the “Tianlong”)

Court of first instance: Nanjing City Intermediate People’s Court No.: (2009)宁民三初字第63号

Court of second instance: Jiangsu Province Higher People’s Court No.: (2011)苏知民终字第0194号

On November 10, 2000, a new three-crossbreed hybrid japonica rice named “9优418”, jointly cultivated by the Liaoning Rice Research Institute (the “LRRI”) and the Xuzhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences (the “AAS”), was approved by the National Crop Variety Approval Committee of China (the “NAVAC”).

How Patentees Protect its Publicized Invention without Grant of Patent Rights?

Posted on December 2, 2013 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) Abstract: After the official publication of an application for a patent of invention, the applicant may demand the entity or individual exploiting that invention to pay an appropriate fee, but is not entitled to prevent others from using the patent. After grant of patent rights by the patent office, the applicant has no right of demanding the subsequent entity or individual to pay an appropriate fee. In today’s post, our case is involved in the 2011 Min Ti Zi No. 259 Civil Judgment of the Supreme People’s Court’s

Trade Secret Litigation Injunction Rulings in China

Posted on August 26, 2013 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) According to media reports (note: the link is in Chinese), Eli Lilly and Company and Eli Lilly (China) sued an employee named Huang in the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People’s Court. That court recently issued the first trade secret litigation injunction in China’s history, and ruled a litigation preservation that prohibited Huang from disclosing, using, or allowing any third party to use 21 documents that were protected as trade secrets by the plaintiff.

Inductions to the Case:

Whether Patented Products’ Profit Influences the duty to Reward Inventors?

Posted on July 29, 2013 by yytbest

Abstract:

Other local laws and regulations cannot be used in legal judgments. Furthermore, enterprises shall award to the employee proper remuneration regardless of profitability.

(By Luo Yanjie) Patent carries huge value to enterprises; key patents can be especially valuable, because they are often only gained after a great deal of expense. Because of this, according to relevant provisions in the Patent Law, the right to apply for a patent belongs to an entity for any invention-creation, either made by a person in the course of executing tasks of the entity he belongs to, or made by him by primarily utilizing material and technical means belonging to the entity. Inventors having rights over inventions is well accepted, but a difficult position for the inventor to be in; often, we find the laws to be inadequate to properly serve and protect the interests of the inventor-creator. In today’s post, we will introduce to you a case touching upon this legal issue.

Has Apple Protected Its APP through the BSA？

Posted on March 28, 2013 by yytbest

The Second Record of the Day Four of the US Visit

(By You Yunting) In late March, the author had the opportunity to make a journey to the United States at the invitation of the U.S. government in order to better understand how the U.S. IPR system operates. On the morning of the fourth day of the journey, the writer visited the Business Software Association (BSA), which originally was not on the list of places to visit; it was later added on the recommendation of the writer. Despite this, the BSA received us with a chief inspection officer. The following is a record of our discussion carried out on that day. The topic of this post only concerns part of the discussion, and the reader may skip to the last part of this article if it interests you.

How Do Chinese Courts Distinguish “Manufacture” and “Sale” When Hearing Design Patent Infringement Cases?

Posted on February 18, 2013 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) Generally, the manufacture and sale of patented products are easily distinguished. Sale normally refers to infringing sale and purchase of patented products with no engagement in assembly or manufacture. In the case introduced in this essay, however, whether the behavior of the defendant was “manufacture” or “sale” is the key point argued. Now we would like to use the case and relevant law to introduce the difference between design patent “manufacture” and “sale.”

How Chinese Courts Determine Remuneration for Employee Inventions?

Posted on January 8, 2013 by yytbest

(By Albert Chen) Yesterday’s post introduced regulations concerning calculation and payment of remuneration for the invention made for hire. The post also pointed out problems in the existing law, both at the by the central government and local level, namely that they lack binding authority, have low enforcement, or provide inadequate regulation on the liability of the unit.

The author has conducted research on these points in the established cases in China and found a case decided last year by the Guangdong High People’s Court (“Guangdong Court”), which is of referential value to settling the above problems.

How Should Chinese Businesses Pay Remuneration for Inventions Created by Their Employees?

Posted on January 7, 2013 by yytbest

(By Albert Chen) Statistics have shown that since 2007, the invention made for hire have comprised over half of China’s patent applications, and the number is still increasing. According to Article 16 of the Patent Law: “The unit that is granted the patent right shall reward the inventor or designer of an employee invention. After such patent is utilized, the inventor or designer shall be given a reasonable amount of remuneration according to the scope of application and the economic results.”

Latest Patent Law Revision Exposure Draft from SIPO

Posted on August 10, 2012 by You Yunting

The State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) published the exposure draft of the amendment to patent law on 9^th August 2012. In this draft, we could find only some clauses are revised, and the followings are the articles translated by us for your reference.

The existing articles	The articles in the exposure draft
Article 46 The patent review board shall examine the request for declaring a patent right invalid and make a decision in a timely manner and notify the requesting person and the patentee of its decision. The decision on declaring a patent right invalid shall be registered and announced by the patent administration department under the State Council.

A person that is dissatisfied with the patent review board’s decision on declaring a patent right invalid or its decision on affirming the patent right may take legal action before a people’s court, within three months from the date of receipt of the notification. The people’s court shall notify the opposite party in the invalidation procedure to participate in the litigation as a third party.Article 46 The patent review board shall examine the request for declaring a patent right invalid and make a decision in a timely manner and notify the requesting person and the patentee of its decision.

The Latest Laws and Regulations of July, II

Posted on August 6, 2012 by You Yunting

V. The Ministry of Finance Issued the Provisions on Handling Accounting of the Pilot Enterprise Levied VAT instead of Business Tax ( the” Provisions”)

On 17^th of July, 2012, the Ministry of Finance issued the Provisions to coordinate the implementation of the pilot work of changing levy of Business Tax to VAT.

(From the website of the Ministry of Finance)

VI. The second Draft of Revised Copyright Law has been Issued for Public Opinions

On 6^th of July, 2012, the National Copyright Administration issued a notice on the second draft of revised Copyright Law of People’s Republic of China for public opinions (the “Notice”). According to the Notice, since the issuance amendment draft of Copyright Law on 31^st of March, 2012, lots of opinions and advices have been proposed by the public, based on which the National Copyright Administration revised and promoted the amendment draft. Additionally, a brief description was issued together with the amendment draft, according such brief description, the revised contents covers the content of copyright, the right of audio-visual performers, performer and recording producer’s right to receive remuneration based on the broadcast of recording production and performance, statutory license, fair use and other aspects. The deadline for the second draft for public opinions is 31^st of July, 2012.

Beijing Files Most IPR Lawsuits in China

Posted on February 15, 2012 by You Yunting

As reported by Mr. Chi Qiang, the chief justice of Beijing Higher People’s Court,on the 5^th Session of the 13^th People’s Congress of Beijing, there have judged 12, 269 IPR cases in Beijing courts of each level, which is a year by year increase of 16.3% and occupies 22.3% of all around China. For these cases, both total amount and new type case are rank first in all the courts nationwide.

Suggestions from Chinese Writer on the Modification on Copyright Law

Posted on January 26, 2012 by You Yunting

The modification on China Copyright Law is under preparation, and as news reports, for the promote of internet prosperity and infringement combat, Ms. Zhang Kangkang, the vice president of Chinese Writers Association and China Literary Copyright Protection Association suggested on the law modification recently:

I. To legally determine the fault ascertainment standard of Safe Harbor Rule

Ms. Zhang suggested to drafted the standard of “known or shall be known” as the legal standard of the ISP fault ascertainment, meanwhile, the obligation of ISP shall also be listed in the modified law while no too high obligation shall be set.

Bridge IP Law Commentary’s opinion: There’s no legal standard on the ascertainment of ISP fault in Copyright Law, with the standard is referred to partly in the Article 36 of Infringement liability law, “Where no measures have been taken by IPS on knowing the infringement or violation by users against others, the ISP shall take the joint liability with the infringer.”

Bridge IP Law Commentary

Your Guide to China IP Law！

Tag Archives: Patent Law