Showing posts with label USTR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USTR. Show all posts

Friday, January 13, 2012

Sanrio Brand Licensor Says The Darndest Things, Or Maybe Not

TGIF

Peter Ollier wrote an article about how Disney and Sanrio are licensing some of their brands in China.

Licensable "cuteness" popular among Hong Kong population
Lanham Place, Mong Kok
Photo: Danny Friedmann
Roberto Lanzi, president of Sanrio Consumer Products for Europe, Middle East and Africa, was speaking at a panel called "Licensing and the flourishing region: Asia", at a conference during the 10th annual Hong Kong International Licensing Show. Mr Lanzi said that he was the only speaker on the panel that did not hate counterfeits.

He claimed to feel relieved when he once saw fake Hello Kitty products being sold in Hong Kong's Ladies Market:

"When Hello Kitty disappears from there we might be dead."

However, the Ladies Market in Mongkok, has been removed by the USTR from the list of Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, on December 20, 2011, see here.
Maybe that is the reason why Mr Lanzi is president for Europe, Middle East and Africa, and not Asia.

UPDATE: In a reaction (still have to verify the identity of commenter) Roberto Lanzi wrote: "I never mentioned Lady's market, I spoke about Temple Street and I was just jocking. Best regards Roberto"

continue reading ...

Friday, March 18, 2011

Online infringement and ISP liability

The IP Dragon hasn’t been seen for 2 weeks now. IP Komodo wonders if his cousin might return soon and is worried about the mess, especially since IP Komodo tends to leave the remains of his lunch lying around...

Some interesting online IPR news IP Komodo has spotted:

Chinese authors accuse Baidu, China's biggest search engine of copyright violations, by its free online excerpts of unauthorized stories and books. On March 15, World Consumer Rights Day, more than 40 writers said in an open letter that Baidu stole their work and infringed their copyrights. Fang Zhouzi, (well-known for exposing academic fraud), told Xinhua that he could find almost all of his work in Baidu's online library. A welcome change to the parade of foreign complainants, IP Komodo thinks.

The State Level AIC is about to issue new regulations on internet IPR infringement aimed particularly at at tackling online piracy and counterfeiting. Evidence and jurisdiction will be covered, according to the vice Minister who announced it at the close of the National Peoples Congress session on Monday.

ISP takedown. Taobao.com, China's leading B2C website, announced on Monday that it will launch a campaign to stop online piracy and counterfeiting. The move comes after the site was labelled by USTR as a "notorious market". Last year, taobao.com deleted more than 5.7 million products involved in copyright infringement. Taobao will set up a special team responsible for checking for piracy and counterfeiting.

Guest post by IP Komodo Dragon
continue reading ...

Monday, March 14, 2011

The Lizard's weekly news roundup

Some of the more interesting news stories IP Komodo has spotted this week:

CNN reports on the growth in counterfeit wine trade in China. Destruction of the bottles is now common practice at the auction houses, for original fine wine bottles are not reused. Label errors are a common giveaway, but recorked fine wines (putting a cheaper 85 Lafite Rothschild into an 82 bottle is a high end way to make fakes). Now HK Customs have seized cheaper wines like Mouton Rothschild and Benfolds (Penfolds fakes) have been seen in China, following the rapid market growth. Read here.

AIC stats Here is a wonderful PRC enforcement statistic from SIPO. During a recent enforcement the campaign, AICs mobilized 1.595 million law enforcement officer/times to examine 3.877 million business owners, and 2,955 illicit dens were banned. Always important to focus on the means not the end…

The USTR report on notorious markets that fingers China's top search engine, Baidu and e-commerce giant Taobao as "notorious markets" for counterfeit and pirated goods is causing consternation in China. Various commentators have come out in defence of the sites, which are of course legitimate business sites as well as used by infringers, arguing that the US is politicizing the issue as regards China, when Ebay has the same problems.

Guest post by IP Komodo Dragon
continue reading ...

Monday, May 10, 2010

What is so special about Special 301 vis-à-vis China?

Each year, since 2005, IP Dragon dealt with the annual Special 301 reports, as a ritual dance in April which had to be described concisely and quickly. Not this year. The ferociousness of the tone by some (see below Messrs. Masnick and Basheer) against the perceived lack of legitimacy, methodology and flawed content of the report combined with the important subject matter made me take a closer look.

First the legitimisation of the Special 301 procedure and its report is explored; then the content of the report about the adequacy and effectiveness of intellectual property in China (this is IP Dragon, after all) is investigated (see Part II), then some of the criticism will be debunked (see Part , and some comments on a comment on Mr Masnick's article will be made. After that the testimonies of messrs. Donnelly, Smith, Mellis and Palmedo regarding IPR in China during the hearing will be looked into.

Legitimisation: "You are not strange, you are eh... special"
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) put China also this year on the so called 'Priority Watch List' and is again subject to 'Section 306 monitoring' ("the USTR may apply sanctions if a country fails to satisfactorily implement an agreement", however these sanctions are restricted to bringing a case to the WTO, see 'Statutory language versus undertakings that remove inconsistency' below). The USTR published its annual report in which it reviews the adequacy and effectiveness of the protection of intellectual property rights in and market access to U.S. persons that rely upon the protection of intellectual property rights.

The Special 301 procedure is pursuant to Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 and the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (enacted in 1994). It was controversial for some time, because many countries thought that it gave the USTR the right in case of a perceived denial of adequate and effective protection of IPRs or market access to retaliate unilaterally. Therefore the European Communities brought a case to the World Trade Organization, which got the code WT/DS152. See an excellent 63-page summary of the case, here.

The main complaint of the European Communities was that Section 301(c), which became later 19 U.S.C. Section 2411, authorises the USTR to "suspend, withdraw, or prevent the application of, benefits of trade agreement concessions", or "impose duties or other import restrictions on the goods of, and … fees or restrictions on the services of, such foreign country for such time asthe Trade Representative determines appropriate". It also came to the conclusion that because the U.S. is a member of the WTO it should bring its trade conflicts to a panel of the Dispute Settlement Body to solve the problems multilaterally. The same is also applicable to Section 306.

Statutory language versus undertakings that remove inconsistency
According to the panel the statutory language was indeed inconsistent with the obligations under the WTO Agreement. However, such inconsistency could be removed upon examination of the US' undertakings: namely a Statement of Administrative Action (SAA) in which the US promised to follow the route set out by the WTO to settle trade conflicts and made a promise that consecutive US governments will honour this pledge.

To be continued: see Part II, Part III and Part IV.
continue reading ...

Thursday, October 22, 2009

20th Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade Between China and US

China and the US will hold their 20th Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) in Hangzhou (Zhejiang province) on October 29th 2009. The first JCCT was established in 1983 as a forum for the two countries to discuss trade and intellectual property matters. It will be the first JCCT meeting under the Obama administration. Li Xianzhi wrote for Xinhua that the meeting will be co-chaired by Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk. Read more here.
continue reading ...

Wednesday, January 07, 2009

USTR in 2008 Report to Congress On China's WTO Compliance: Still Not Satisfied After All These Years

One of the priority issues in the 115 page 2008 Report to Congress On China's WTO Compliance, released by the United States Trade Representative (USTR) in December is, unsurprisingly, the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in China. Below you will find a selection of the USTR report which shows where China has room for improvement:

Pg 3. "In two other WTO cases, a challenge to key aspects to China's IPR enforcement regime, along with a challenge to market access restrictions affecting the importation and distribution of copyrighted-intensive products such as books, newspapers, journals, theatrical films, DVDs and music, ..."
More surprisingly, however, is the statement in bold:
Pg 4. "..., including the setting of unique Chinese national standards, the tremendous expansion of the test market for China's homegrown 3G telecommunications standard, China's government procurement practices, an array of policies promoting and protecting "pillar industries,", the promotion of famous Chinese brands of merchandise using what appear to be prohibited forms of financial support, ..." Read IP Dragon's 'Well known and Less Known Aspects of Well-Known Marks.
IP Dragon has dealt with the subject of China's homegrown 3G standard and hopes to interview the government procurement in China specialist and president of the China-Mekong Law Center professor Daniel Mitterhof about the intellectual property in China aspects, this year. After some compliments to China steps to protect IPRs the USTR writes:
Pg 4. "However, some critical reforms are still needed in a few areas, such as further improvement of China's measures for copyright protection on the Internet following China's notable accession to the World Intellectual Property Rights Organization (WIPO) Internet treaties, .and correction of continuing deficiencies in China's criminal measures."
Pg 5. "In addition, effective enforcement of China's IPR laws and regulations remains a significant challenge. Despite repeated anti-pirated campaigns in China and an increasing number of civil IPR cases in Chinese courts, counterfeiting and piracy remain at unacceptably high levels and continue to cause serious harm to US businesses accross many sectors of the economy."

To measure whether China's enforcement of intellectual property rights improves IP Dragon has proposed the use of the Enforcement/Infringement ratio.
Pg 5. "The United States also continued to prosecute a WTO case challenging specific deficiencies in China's legal regime for protecting and enforcing copyrights and trademarks. Following the establishment of a WTO panel last year to hear the case, 12 WTO members joined in as third parties. Proceedings before the panel took place in April and June 2008, and the panel is expected to make its decision public in 2009."
Pg 72. "For example, one major weakness is China's chronic underutilization of deterrent criminal remedies. In particular, legal measures in China that establish high thresholds for criminal investigation, prosecution and conviction preclude criminal remedies in many instances of commercial-scale counterfeiting and piracy, creating a "safe-harbor" for infringers and raising concerns that China may not be complying with its obligations under the TRIPs Agreement."
Pg. 74. "..more work is needed at b the national level and the provincial level to meet the challenges of Internet piracy and fully implement the WIPO Internet treaties."
Pg 75. "...the lack of criminal liability for certain acts of copyright infringement, the profit motive requirement of identical trademarks in counterfeiting cases, and the absence of minimum, proportional sentences and clear standards of initiation of police investigations in cases where there is a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity."

Pg 76. "...China could clarify that certain Internet "deep linking" and other services that effectively encourage or induce infringement are unlawful."
Pg 76. "Disposal of confiscated goods remains a problem under the implementing rules, which appear to mandate auction following removal of infringing features, rather than destruction of infringing goods not purchased by the right holder or used for public welfare."

Pg 76. "The United States also remains concerned about a variety of weaknesses in China's legal framework that do not effectively deter, and may even encourage, certain types of infringing activity, such as "squatting" of foreign company names, designs and trademarks, the theft of trade secrets, the registration of other companies' trademarks as design patents and vice versa, the use of falsified or misleading license documents or company documentation to creat the appearance of legitimacy in counterfeiting operations, and false indications of geographic origin of products."

Pg 76. "The United States has urged China to provide greater protection against unfair commercial use of undisclosed test and other data submitted by foreign pharmaceuticals companies seeking marketing approval for their products. The United States has also encouraged China to undertake a more robust system of patent linkage and to consider the adoption of a system of patent term restoration. In addition, built-in delays in China's marketing approval system for pharmaceuticals continue to create incentives for counterfeiting, as does China's inadequate regulatory oversight of the production of active pharmaceutical ingredients by domestic chemical manufacturers."

Conform the conclusion of my thesis, the USTR points to some extra-judicial factors that influence the enforcement of IPR negatively:

Pg 77. "IPR enforcement is hampered by lack of coordination among Chinese government ministries and agencies, lack of training, resource constraints, lack of transparency in the enforcement process and its outcomes, and local protectionism and corruption."

Pg. 77. "Trade in pirated optical discs continues to thrive, supplied by both licensed and unlicensed factories and by smugglers. Small retail shops continue to be the major commercial outlets for pirated movies and music (and a variety of counterfeit goods). Piracy of books and journals and end user piracy of business software also remain key concerns, although improvements have been seen in business software piracy rates, as discussed above. In addition, Internet piracy is increasing, as is piracy over enclosed networks such as universities."

Pg. 77. "...right holders have monitored China's efforts and report little meaningful improvement in piracy of pre-release titles in several major cities."

Appendix 3 shows a fact sheet of the 18th US-China Commission on Commerce and Trade Meeting, December 11, 2007, was given:

It states about Intellectual Property Rights:

  • China reported on steps it has taken since the previous JCCT meeting in April 2006 to improve protection of intellectual property rights in China, including accession to the WIPO internet treaties, a crackdown on the sale of computers not pre-loaded with legitimate software, enforcement efforts against counterfeit textbooks and treaching materials, and joint enforcement raids conduct by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Chinese security agencies.
  • China and the United States agreed to exchange information on customs seizures of counterfeit goods in order to further focus China's enforcement resources on companies exporting such goods.
  • China agreed to strenghten enforcement of laws against company name misuse, a practice in which some Chinese companies have registered legitimate US trademarks and trade names without legal authority to do so. The two sides also agreed to cooperate on case-by-case enforcement against such company name misuse.

Appendix 4 shows a fact sheet of the 19th US-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade Meeting, September 16, 2008.

It states about Intellectual Property Rights:

  • China and the United States noted the importance of ongoing dialogue and cooperative efforts taking place under the JCCT IPR Working Group, which met September 4-5 in Beijing, and agreed to hold regular meetings of the IPR Working Group in the future.
  • China and the United States agreed to continue pursuing cooperative activities in addition to formal meetings of the IPR Working Group, on such issues as: IPR and innovation, including China's development of guidelines on IPR and standards; public-private discussions on copyright and internet piracy challenges, including infringement on user-generated content sites; reducing the sale of pirated and counterfeit goods at wholesale and retail markets; and other issues of mutual interest.
  • China and the United States welcomed plans to conduct further cooperative meetings between responsible officials regarding: China's patent law amendments now under consideration in the National People's Congress; pharmaceutical data protection; and the Memorandum of Cooperation on Strenghened Cooperation in Border Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights.
  • China and the United States agreed to sign two IPR memoranda of understanding (MOUs) on strategic cooperation to improve the administration and effectiveness of copyright and trademark protection and enforcement, as soon as possible but no later than the end of 2008. The MOUs will be signed between the US Patent and Trademark Office, the US Copyright Office, China's National Copyright Administration and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce.
continue reading ...

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Deadline Submissions for Special Provincial Review of IPR in China Approaches

February 26, before 5 pm is the deadline for public comments concerning the locations and issues that should be the focus of a special provincial review of IPR in China.

April 28, 2006 the USTR released its annual Special 301 Report and announced to conduct a special provincial review.

"The goal of this review is to spotlight strengths, weaknesses, and inconsistencies, in and among specific jurisdictions, and to inform the Special 301 Review of China as a whole."

"Jurisdictions at the provincial level might include in addition to China's provinces (sheng), the four municipalities (shi) of Beijing, Chongqing, Shanghai, Tianjin, as well as China's five autonomous regions (zizhiqu)."

If the transparency increases at a regional level, countries can treat the regions that protect and enforce IPR adequately in a preferential way.

Read more here.

Richard Brubaker of All Roads Lead to China included the following question, while conducting a 20 city survey on manufacturing: "Are there any specific cases where IPR suits have been filed, and what was the outcome?" Read the results of the survey for Ningbo, Wuhan, Xian, Xiamen, Nanjing and Chendu here.
continue reading ...

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

China's TRIPs Compliance Five Years Later: What's The Score?

Today the USTR issued the 2006 Report to Congress On China's WTO Compliance, including nine pages (70-79) about China's intellectual property enforcement. Nothing really surprising, but it gives an overview of China's compliance with TRIPs through the eyes of the USTR.

Pages 96-99, about the legal framework, including transparency, uniform application of laws and judicial review are also relevant for those interested in TRIPs compliance.

Read here.
continue reading ...