Showing posts with label National strategy on IPR protection. Show all posts
Showing posts with label National strategy on IPR protection. Show all posts

Monday, January 10, 2011

Greatest Start of the Year: Global Forum on Intellectual Property 2011 Singapore

The Global Forum on Intellectual Property (GFIP) 2011 in Singapore (6-7 January), a bi-annual event, was greater than ever before. It is clear Singapore is committed to becoming a IP hub. Over 95 professors and practitioners (lawyers, judges, inhouse counsels, business people), bloggers and readers who gave speeches about their reflections on the past, their thoughts about the present, and their forcasts for the future of IP. Theory, practice, strategies and tactics on the protection and enforcement of IP were all evocatively conveyed to an audience that was as learned as the speakers. Professor David Llewelyn, chairman of the GFIP and external director of the IP Academy of Singapore, mastermind behind the whole operation has outdone himself. The theme 'Turbulant Times: Onwards and Upwards for Intellectual Property?' was well chosen and during the opening ceremony even Mr K. Shanmugam, minister of home affairs and law gave his acte de présence.

IP rules the world economy


The first keynote address by Professor Peter Williamson (Judge Business School, University of Cambridge and co-author of 'Dragons at Your Door: How Chinese Cost Innovation is Disrupting lobal Competition') was talking about IP and China.

Chinese innovation: using seemingly obsolete technology to gain cost reductions



Professor Williamson asserted that China's innovation did not fall out of the sky. Rather, it was an evolving innovation after 25 years of simple innovations. Look for example to BYD, the car manufacturer who started as a battery manufacturer. The 1990s had an emphasis on cost cutting, according to Professor Williamson. Now Chinese companies look at technologies that seem obsolete and see whether they can transform it into an innovative product. "Can I use low costs to do innovation? It's the thrust of Chinese innovation." Professor Williamson gave the example of the digital direct x-ray equipment. The market for x-ray equipment was first dominated by GE and Philips. The Chinese companies applied their low cost invention to mainstream application. It's not patentable, but it changes the market. Innovations are fast in China, because the cycles they make are frequent. In the West there are less developments between innovations. These Chinese innovations are on a large scale and made for commercialisaton.

Williamson said that patents in China were quite isolated; not many collaborations were going on. He said that China is going to find its own kind of institutional structure, unlike Japan who copied US institutions. which was not such a great success.
During a judges' debate which included the retired Chief Justice of the IPR Tribunal of the Supreme People's Court, Dr Jiang Zhipei, who is now senior advisor to Fangda Partners, a Chinese law firm in the commercial field, the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Washington D.C., Hon. Randall R. Rader, made an appeal to all judges present: to learn as much as possible from each other and to look at the consequences of their judgments, and if they would not they will be sanctioned by the market.

Judge Rader: "If you [as a judge] will not oversee the consequences of your actions, you will be punished by the market"



Photo panelists from left to right: Justice Andrew Phang (Judge of Appeal, Supreme Court of Singapore), Judge Joachim Bornkamm (Presiding Judge, Federal Supreme Court of Germany), Hon. Randall R. Rader (Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Washington D.C.), Professor Llewelyn (moderator), Sir Richard Arnold, Judge of the High Court, Chancery Division, Hon. Robert van Peursem, Vice President, District Court of The Hague, the Netherlands. Dr Jiang Zhipei part of the panel is 0n the next photo.

To facilitate and not only regulate the market. Judge Rader was not only very informative but entertaining as well and he inspired at least two other speakers to give the audience a choice about the topics on which he was willing to speak. Judge Rader's dramatic descent from the stage to level with the audience was only replicated by Mr Tilman Lueder, head of the unit Copyright and Knowledge-based Economy, Directorate-General Market and Services, who gave attribution to the judge. Judge Rader's singing was only replicated by himself.


Dr Jiang Zhipei is the author of China IPR Law. He asserted that the patent system in China, that has just been amended in 2008, must be reformed and perfected. He offers 8 suggestions:

Dr Jiang: 8 improvements to China's patent law


1. China should deepen its reform and opening up policy, and constantly improve the development mechanism;

2. A stronger, more mature, transparent and consistent China is a prerequisite for the litigation process. Litigants should have confidence that China's litigation process system operates objectively and fairly;

3. Chinese courts should realize uniform and efficient IP judicial protection according to the Compendium of China's National IP Strategy;

4. The Supreme People's Court should establish and perfect relevant litigation procedures such as judicial IP authentication, procedures for expert witnesses, technical investigation and pre-trial interim measures;

5. Chinese courts will explore the possibility of establishing specialised IP tribunals accepting civil, administrative and criminal cases together, and to integrate and optimize resources;

6. Enhancing communication between countries is important;

7. To raise the level of enforcement judgments, strengthening of law enforcement cooperation between difference departments;

8. Summarizing the experience in the process is sometimes more important than just continuing.

More postings about the GFIP 2011 event will follow.

continue reading ...

Friday, June 18, 2010

China's National Intellectual Property Strategy, What's The Progress? Website To Stay Updated

September 11, 2008 IP Dragon published 'China's National IP Strategy 2008: Feasible Commitments or Road to Nowhere Paved With Good Intentions.' To "popularise" and to keep those interested in the progress of China in implementing its National IP Strategy a website was launched on June 5th, see here (Chinese).

The site has 10 main categories:
  • Important news;
  • Media viewpoint;
  • National strategy;
  • Ministry developments;
  • Regional strategy;
  • Industry strategy;
  • IPR protection;
  • International developments;
  • Strategy research;
  • Strategy special.
Below I summarise the first article in the category 'Important news':

Li Changchun (a Politburo politician at the Standing Committee): 'Cultural Industries Are the Resource for Intellectual Property Rights Output'. June 16th, 2010, Mr Li's article 'Correctly understanding and handling the cultural construction and development efforts to the relationship between a number of aspects of major socialist culture with Chinese characteristics and the path of development.

Mr Li understands that by developing Chinese culture new intellectual property rights will be created. This will involve many jobs, for which no plants are needed nor land. For this the relationship between culture and intellectual property must be researched. Also the relationship between culture and economy; culture and technology must be correctly understood. And the relationship between domestic and foreign culture. "Foreign culture must be actively absorbed."

Read the full article here in Chinese.
continue reading ...

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Don't Feed The Patent Trolls in China and Start Your Own IP Team

Tian Lipu, commissioner of the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) visited Samsung, according to the China Daily. Mr Tian was told by the Keun-Hee Park, president of Samsung's operations in China that patent trolls were on the rise.

One can argue that a patent troll, or more neutrally called a non-practising entity (NPE) abuses its intellectual property: the patent is only used to enforce or threaten to enforce it via litigation. This way, they do not create added value to society, because (except for lawyers and magistrates) and form an obstacle to research and/or manufacturing of some product.

According to PatentFreedom, a website providing research on and strategy about NPEs, Samsung has been relentlessly pursued and ranks sixth by the number of NPE lawsuits it was involved in in 2009. See the list at the site of PatentFreedom here.

Mr Tian was quoted saying: "Since the Chinese government adopted a national intellectual property strategy in 2008, fighting such inappropriate use of patents has been listed as one of five top priorities on our agenda."

If one reads Article 4 (Preventing Abuses of IPRs) of Chapter III Strategic Focus of the National Intellectual Property Strategy 2008 you will see: (14) Formulate relevant laws and regulations d to reasonably define the scope of intellectual property. Prevent abuses of intellectual property. Maintain fair market competition. Safeguard the public lawful rights and interests.

The fact that Samsung founded a special intellectual property team was praised by Mr Tian. It is "of demonstrational significance" to Chinese companies, according to Mr Tian. Whether Samsung's example will be followed remains to be seen.

Read the China Daily article here.

UPDATE: Anonymous wrote a very interesting comment:

"As many Chinese commentators have noted, what constitutes patent "misuse" or "abuse" is unclear in China. Also, what constitutes an "NPE" or "troll" or (in Chinese) "cockroach" is also unclear. If it is simply a "non-practicing entity" then all research institutions may be trolls. The concept of "abuse" in Chinese (lanyong) likely encompasses "abuse" under the Chinese antitrust law (Art. 55) and may also encompass "misuse" - which is typically a defense to infringement and not an affirmative claim in the US. Moreover, there are aspects of the issue which involve patent examinations/grants/novelty requirements and patent litigation (damages/availability of injunctive relief). A country, such as China can have a relatively high level of NPE's (or non-service inventions), esp. in patents that are not examined for substance (utility model and design patents), or in patents that were once examined only on grounds of "relative novelty" (under the former patent law), but the patents may have a low value for litigation (damages or injunctions, or preliminary injunctions). Moreover, there may be limited means of compensating a victim for abusive assertion of rights - under US "Walker Process" type remedies, or "Rule 11" or other doctrines."
continue reading ...

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

National IP Strategy 2010 Is Coming

In 2008 China launched a comprehensive National IP Strategy, read 'Feasible Commitments or Road To Nowhere Paved With Good Intentions'.

March 1, 2010, China's State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) announced that during the second liaison officer meeting a draft of new National IP Strategy is discussed. See here.

Wondering what the changes will be. To be continued.

text/picture: Danny Friedmann
continue reading ...

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Taylor Wessing Global Intellectual Property Index and China: The Last Shall Be The First

The People's Republic of China was ranked last (24th position) in the Taylor Wessing Global Intellectual Property Index 2009, see here. The methodology of the GIPI rating is a calculation by a factor assessment model with jurisdiction assessments and instrumental factors as input. See the methodology here

About China's trademark system Taylor Wessing complains about the delay in adopting the new Trademark Law which it sees as the solution to the registry delays and backlogs. The time from application to publication of trademarks in China is according to Taylor Wessing currently three years and the duration of opposition procedures up to five years. It says that there is an "absence of any protection for unregistered marks, save the 230 or so marks held to be “famous” (of which only about 20 are foreign), remains a concern for respondents." Taylor Wessing is more positive about China's National IP Strategy and an electronic application system which has cut costs and allocated filing receipts and application numbers quite quickly.

About China's copyright system Taylor Wessing wrote: "China trails overall, as well as for each
of the attacking, enforcing, exploiting and cost-effectiveness subindices." The lack of effective enforcement of copyright is respondents' primary concern, as is bureaucracy associated with giving evidence, and criminal remedies that are perceived as too low, underused and with thresholds set too high, civil and administrative remedies inadequate. Taylor Wessing mentioned also the harsh criticism China received from the USTR in the Special 301 Report. The supporting argument that China faces the "the harshest and most in-depth criticism" because it was covered in 24 pages while the other 45 countries only got 16 pages is not very convincing. It is not the quantity but the quality of the commentary that counts. On a positive note Taylor Wessing acknowledged that the US government considers that progress is being made because China is fulfilling its WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) and WTO TRIPs obligations. 

About design Taylor Wessing wrote that "China’s courts have awarded $3 million to the German
bus maker, Neoplan, in one of the biggest design patent infringement awards since China joined the WTO in 2001." China’s design system which requires annual renewals of designs (plus renewal fees) is seen by respondents as onerous and in need of reform, according to Taylor Wessing.

About China's domain names system Taylor Wessing wrote that although China has liberal registration rules it ranked low, because domain names are extremely cheap to register in China, which has encouraged domain name squatters. Taylor Wessing: "It remains to be seen whether the recent exponential increase in numbers (nearly 90% last year) is an ongoing trend or a spike, and also whether brand owners’ awareness of the issue and increasing interest in doing business in China will lead to them registering more pre-emptive .cn domain name." 

About China's Patent system Taylor Wessing was quite positive: "China certainly has also made significant efforts over the past few years to improve its IP systems." The respondents appreciated China's new specialist IP courts, that are relatively much speedier than before and anticpate the Third Amendment to the Patent Law which will take effect October 1st, 2009 and will introduce the absolute international novelty standard and the possibility of compulsory licensing for patents unused within 3 years of grant. 

I am not sure whether Matthew 20:16 (King James Bible) can bring any consolation for China's low score, but here goes: "So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen."
continue reading ...

Monday, April 06, 2009

Guidelines of the Supreme People's Court on Implementing the National IP Strategy

Last year China's State Council promulgated the National IP Strategy ("National IP Strategy 2008: Feasible Commitments or Road to Nowhere Paved with Good Intentions" read here), a roadmap that must lead China to become one of the most innovative countries by 2020. The goals formulated in the National IP Strategy were laudable indeed. Question was, how to achieve these goals? Now the Supreme People's Court has formulated some guidelines: 'Comments of the Supreme People's Court on Implementing the National Intellectual [Property] Rights Protection Strategy'. Read the Xinhua article via People's Daily Online here.

Peter Ollier and Janice Qu give a good overview of the guidelines in an article for Managing Intellectual Property; read it here.

I don't have the document, yet. Make my day and send it to ipdragon at gmail dot com. Thanks.
I will come back to it, after I got a chance to read it.

UPDATE: Jing "Brad" Luo of China Business Law sent me the link to the guidelines in Chinese, see here. Thanks Bradford!
continue reading ...

Friday, January 16, 2009

World Trademark Review: "US crowns China top of the counterfeiters"

Adam Smith of the World Trademark Review wrote an article that put a few of the actual news events into perspective.: The news of the US customs that the People's Republic of China is number one origin of counterfeit goods seized in the US, Chinese ministers that held a meeting (12 January 2009) on the country’s National Intellectual Property Strategy, about which I wrote 'Feasible commitments or Road to nowhere paved with good intententions'.

Mr Smith asked yours truly whether this recent meeting of Chinese ministers will do anything to tackle the huge problem of counterfeiting?

My answer: The Chinese ministers might feel that their hands are tied. On the one hand they want to enforce intellectual property rights, but on the other they do not want to increase unemployment and cause social unrest by putting whole villages out of work that sustain on the manufacturing of counterfeit products. This is a fortiori so, because of the economic downturn.
Well the last sentence was not published, but is relevant I think. Read Mr Smith's World Trademark Review article here.
continue reading ...

Thursday, September 11, 2008

China's National IP Strategy 2008: Feasible Commitments or Road to Nowhere Paved With Good Intentions

This article by Danny Friedmann is also published at the site of Duncan Bucknell Company, the consulting firm that specialises in global intellectual property strategy, see here.

China's State Council promulgated a National Intellectual Property Strategy [1]. In the policy document there is a lot of talk about doing everything more efficient and more effective. Great, but how to achieve these laudable goals?

Over the last two decades, and especially around the time China ascended to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 2001, China impressively improved its system of IP protection and enforcement. However, it’s aspirations to make the enforcement “hard as steel and definitely not soft as bean curd” as China’s premier Wen Jiaobao aspired for in 2006 [2], have not yet materialised. In the so called Compendium of China's National Intellectual Property Strategy [3], an extensive list of aspirations and measures, China is vowing to develop itself into a country with a relatively higher level of intellectual property right creation, utilisation, protection and administration by 2020.

So what exactly is a national IP strategy? Are all desired goals and commitments in there? What is missing? And how to achieve the goals set out in the strategy?

What is a national IP strategy?

National IP strategies are en vogue. The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) has gathered the summary of the national IP strategies of 21 countries, plus the African Union and the European Union [4]. WIPO’s definition of a national IP strategy is: “a set of measures formulated and implemented by a government to encourage and facilitate effective creation, development and management of intellectual property.” Professor Daniel Gervais [5] points out to the fact that to make a proper policy analysis is impossible or inherently unreliable, because theoretical models are inadequate or valid empirical data unavailable. Despite this correct observation the promulgation of a national IP strategy can clarify common goals. In this case the national IP strategy is a product of the National Working Group for IPR, made up of 13 officials from 12 IP-related agencies and ministries, including the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO), Customs, the Supreme People’s Court and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) [6]. So the commitments set in the national IP strategy will be broadly embraced, which increases its chances to be realised.

What stands out in the national IP strategy?

Paragraph 13, 14 and 15 give the contours of strengthening IPRs protection, preventing abuses of IPRs and fostering a culture of IPRs. After that is becomes more interesting, because the more specific tasks are announced. The key industry sectors where China wants to obtain strategic patents are given in paragraph 16. They include: biology, medicine, information, new materials, advanced manufacturing, new energy, oceanography, resources, environmental protection, modern agriculture, modern transportation, aeronautics and astronautics. It is safe to predict that one can expect a lot of patent activities in China in these industry sectors.
Paragraph 17 is about setting technology standards. Chinese national standards, such as AVS in the audio-visual industry [7], the Chinese version of the RFID standard [8] or the TD-SCMDA in the telecoms industry [9] have a chance of developing into de facto international standards, because of China’s growing economical significance in the world.
Paragraph 19 deals with patent examination. It is clear that patent quality in China has enough room for improvement [10]. In the document one cannot find surprising new strategies for trademarks or copyright protection and enforcement. “Stealing trade secrets it to be severely punished according with law”, paragraph 29 stipulates. But as we will see below, sometimes this bland language is a prelude to concrete change, although it is unclear when this will happen. Until now trade secrets are dealt with in China’s Labour Contract Law [11].
China wants to establish or improve upon a protection system for geographical indications (paragraph 32), genetic resources (paragraph 33), traditional knowledge (paragraph 34), folklores (paragraph 35) and layout-designs of integrated circuits (paragraph 36). The wording of these goals and commitments is vague, because how do you measure whether a system is strengthened or sound, and when can you say that the utilisation of rights is more effective?
More promising is paragraph 45 which stipulates that the trial system for intellectual property should be improved upon, the allocation of judicial resources optimised and remedy procedures simplified. In this paragraph the need for studies to establish special tribunals for civil, administrative and criminal cases involving intellectual property rights is articulated. Also the centralisation of jurisdiction involving patents or other highly technical cases will be studied. This makes a lot of sense, since it will build expertise and bring experience together. Although, this concept is not really new: since 1993, Chinese courts have made efforts to establish special trial chambers of IP. In 2000, China set up special and independent divisions to exclusively deal with all IP related civil cases. These so called No. 3 (or No. 5) Civil Divisions, can be found at the Supreme People’s Court, all High People’s Courts, Intermediate People’s Courts in all provincial cities and many big cities, and even a few Basic People’s Courts. Judges on the panels have science or engineering backgrounds and experience in dealing with IP cases. Such courts include the Intermediate People’s Courts in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen [12].
Another good development mentioned in paragraph 45 is that China explores to set up courts of appeal for IP cases. This will improve the uniform and consistent application of laws, which will increase the certainty for all stakeholders in the legal process. Paragraph 52 states the commitment to get high quality databases for patents, trademarks, copyrights, layout-designs of integrated circuits, new varieties of plants and geographical indications. This could dramatically add to the transparency of intellectual property rights in China.

What is lacking in the national IP strategy?

To achieve any goal, one has first to know exactly where one stands. Therefore one needs to be able to measure in an objective way the enforcement and infringement levels in China. For this purpose one could use the Enforcement/Infringement Ratio this author has proposed in his thesis [13]. When the position is known one can set goals, which are well defined and attainable. The vague language in the national IP strategy is not very conducive for this purpose and it remains silent about what the level of IP enforcement compared to the level of infringement should be. The following concepts; effective enforcement and deterrent remedy should be precisely defined.
There is a paragraph about an interdepartmental coordination mechanism to make overall plans for the development of IP human resources (paragraph 59), but there is no plan for a better coordination between the different administrative authorities with overlapping capabilities, such as the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) and the Administration of Quality and Security Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ) concerning the enforcement of infringed trademarks. In addition to this, there is no plan for a better coordination between the administrative authorities and the Public Security Bureau (PSB) so that criminal cases will be transferred to the PBS, which hardly happens at this moment in time.
One of the most fundamental challenges IP enforcement in China faces is that there is state by law instead of state of law. The law is used to achieve government policies, instead that government policies are used to apply the law. Therefore the administrative route of enforcement is preferred by the Chinese government, so that the judicial enforcement route has still to be developed more fully.

How to implement the national IP strategy?

Annually China comes up with action plans on the enforcement of IPR which have to implement the national IP strategy. March of this year China launched the Action plan on IPR protection 2008 [14]. It deploys 280 detailed measures and announced 16 massive campaigns to fight IP piracy and infringement. Every year these campaigns get names such as ‘Fight Piracy Every Day’, ‘Zero Counterfeiting in Ten Thousand Shops of One Hundred Cities’ and ‘Special Operation Thunderstorm’ on patent protection.
Action Plan 2007 [15] also launched this kind of campaigns with imaginative names and so did Action Plan 2006 [16, 17] Are these massive, temporal, top-down initiated campaigns effective? They might draw attention to the case of IPR protection and enforcement and educate the public at large. However, temporal campaigns that crackdown on piracy and infringement fight the symptoms, but do not seem to solve the fundamental extra-judicial problems of IPR enforcement in China [18].
On a positive note Action Plan 2008 [19] shows that it takes the coordination of criminal cases between administrative authorities and the PBS very serious. Another good omen is that it states that “the People’s courts in central and western parts of China where IPR cases have serious quality problems and the legal team relatively weak” need targeted supervision, inspection and training [20]. This is a probably a good way to fight the prevalent legal protectionism [21]. Other good news in Action Plan 2008 is that China wants to do special research to build a trade secret system and come up with a judicial interpretation about trade secrets [22].
Well who knows, maybe we can “greet the spring of IP cause” soon, as Tian Lipu, SIPO’s commissioner, put it so optimistically and poetically at the beginning of this year [23].
Danny Friedmann/IP Dragon 知識產權龍

Notes and links:

[1] - National Intellectual Property Strategy issued by the State Council of the People’s Republic of China on June 5, 2008, available at http://www.law-now.com/law-now/sys/getpdf.htm?pdf=outlineofthenationalintellectualpropertystrategy1.pdf.
[2] - ‘Full manuscript of The Times interview with Wen Jiabao’ during his visit to the ASEM, in Helsinki, Finland, The Austalian, September 6, 2006.
[3] - ‘Compendium of China National Intellectual Property Strategy issued’, Intellectual Property Protection in China, SIPO.gov.cn, June 6, 2008, available at http://english.ipr.gov.cn/ipr/en/info/Article.jsp?a_no=214475&col_no=925&dir=200806.
[4] - ‘IP Strategies and Innovation Intellectual Property and New Technologies Division’, WIPO, updated until January 2007, available at http://www.wipo.int/ip-development/en/strategies/national_ip_strategies.html#what.
[5] - Daniel J. Gervais, ‘The TRIPS Agreement and the changing landscape of international intellectual property’, Chaper 3 of Intellectual Property and TRIPs Compliance in China, Edward Elgar, 2007, pg. 65.
[6] - Peter Ollier, ‘China releases national IP strategy, Managing Intellectual Property, June 13, 2008, available at http://www.managingip.com/Article/1945806/China-releases-National-IP-Strategy.html.
[7] - ‘China is developing new standard to own IP’, IP Dragon, February 22, 2006, available at http://ipdragon.blogspot.com/2006/02/china-is-developing-new-standard-to.html.
[8] - ‘China develops own RFID standard to own IPR’, IP Dragon, March 14, 2006, available at http://ipdragon.blogspot.com/2006/03/china-develops-new-rfid-standard-to.html.
[9] - ‘China’s wish to circumvent 3G royalties has its price’, IP Dragon, June 20, 2007, available at http://ipdragon.blogspot.com/2007/06/chinas-wish-to-circumvent-3g-royalties.html.
[10] - ‘Patent quality in China: “You could patent a wheel”, July 3, 2008, IP Dragon, available at http://ipdragon.blogspot.com/2008/07/patent-quality-in-china-you-could.html.
[11] - ‘What has Labour Contract Law in China to do with IP?”, November 15, 2007, IP Dragon, available athttp://ipdragon.blogspot.com/2007/11/what-has-labour-contract-law-in-china.html.
[12] - Danny Friedmann, ‘Paper Tiger or Roaring Dragon, China’s TRIPs Implementations and Enforcement’, July 10, 2007, pg. 98, available at http://www.nfprojects.nl/ipdragon/Paper_Tiger_or_Roaring_Dragon.pdf.
[13] - Data key on road to IPR transparency, IP Dragon, December 19, 2007, available at http://ipdragon.blogspot.com/2007/12/data-key-on-road-to-ipr-transparency.html.
[14] - Action Plan on IPR protection 2008, March 18, 2008, available at http://english.ipr.gov.cn/ipr/en/info/Article.jsp?a_no=197210&col_no=925&dir=200804.
[15] - Action Plan on IPR protection 2007, April 6, 2007, available at http://zgb.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/az/k/200704/20070404541058.html.
[16] - Action Plan 2006 on IPR Protection – I, available at http://sbj.saic.gov.cn/english/show.asp?id=460&bm=sbyw.
[17] - Action Plan 2006 on IPR Protection – II available at http://sbj.saic.gov.cn/english/show.asp?id=461&bm=sbyw.
[18] - Friedmann, see note 11, pg. 58.
[19] - Action Plan on IPR protection 2008, Chapter IV Institution Building, paragraphs I (3) and III (1), (3) and (4), see note 13.
[20] - Action Plan on IPR protection 2008, Chapter VI Training and Education (II)(13), see note 13.
[21] - Friedmann, see note 11, pg. 69.
[22] - Action Plan on IPR protection 2008, Chapter X (I)(V)(1) and Chapter VII (X)(I)(2), see note 13.
[23] - Tian Lipu, ‘To Greet the Spring of IP Cause’, 2008 New Year Address, SIPO, January 3, 2008, available at http://www.sipo.gov.cn/sipo_English/about/commissioner/200801/t20080103_229110.htm.
continue reading ...

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

China's New National Strategy On IPR Protection Will Come Out First Half 2007

Luan Shanglin of Xinhua reports: "China's national strategy on IPR protection will come out in the first half of this year. It is composed of 20 topics and one guideline, covering system building, law enforcement, talents training and public awareness regarding the IPR protection."

Read more about the two-day Global Forum on Intellectual Property Rights Protection and Innovation which opened in Beijing last Tuesday here.

Good strategy, bad tactics?

Is seems the release of new strategies are getting a much higer frequency. Before, in 1995 and 2006 China's action plans were released. However, to have a good strategy does not necessarily mean it will be performed well.

Update:

The article 'Focus of IPR strategy to be broadened' in the China Daily said:

" The government is expected to widen its focus on intellectual property rights (IPR) from protection-only to creation, utilization and protection of innovation, with the release of its long-awaited strategy."

"The national strategy on IPR, which aims to safeguard the transition to an innovative nation, has been in the pipeline since January 2005 and has involved 28 agencies within the central government."

State IPRs part of strategy?
Niu Wenyuan, chief scientist on sustainable development with the Chinese Academy of Sciences, proposed to "have a national procurement system to buy those innovations, which are critical to the nation, but do not have any immediate commercial returns, as well as build an efficient IPR transfer network."
continue reading ...