NEWS
NEWS
On March 10, the WIPO published the “Patent Landscape Report: COVID-19 Related Vaccines and Therapeutics”, which found that the greatest number of COVID-19 patent filings were related to conventional vaccine technologies and repurposed drugs, followed by more-novel vaccine technologies like mRNA. The report is part of WIPO's package of pandemic support measures and is the first publication of its kind to identify and analyze COVID-19 related patenting activity. The directors of WIPO, the WHO and WTO delivered speeches respectively, and representatives of relevant intellectual property offices, international organizations, research institutes and other institutions, including the NIPA, exchanged and shared views on scientific research in the fields of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics.
In the first 21 months of the pandemic, close to 5,300 patent applications relating to COVID-19 were filed across 49 patent offices. This included nearly 1,500 filings related to therapeutics and over 400 filings related to vaccines. For vaccine filings, universities and public research organizations accounted for 44 percent of the total, compared with 49 percent by companies.
The report stated that China contributes the most patent applications for COVID-19 vaccines and treatments. As of September 2021, there were 276 vaccine-related patent applicants from China, and the Chinese applicants also applied for 887 COVID-19 therapeutics patents. In terms of specific research and development, according to data from WHO, until October 2021, there are 34 COVID-19 vaccines experimenting in China, of which 23 had entered the clinical trial stage, ranking the second worldwide.
Source: known productivity
Date: 2022/03/14
ZLWD Commentary：
The report highlights how research organizations and universities worked together with private industry to help speed the development of life-saving COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics. The WIPO Director General Daren Tang pointed out that this report underscores that the pandemic triggered an unprecedented mobilization of the global scientific community and it shines a light on the complementary and reinforcing roles played by companies, startups, universities and research institutions in the development of COVID-related treatments.
Recently, the Regulations of the NIPA on the Credit Management of Intellectual Property Rights (“the Regulation”) started its implementation. The Regulations is based on the establishment and improvement of the credit management mechanism of the NIPA. Six specific acts are classified as acts of dishonesty, and the subject of the act of dishonesty will be subject to the management measures for one to three years. These six types of dishonest acts are: 1) abnormal patent application behaviors which are not for the purpose of protection of innovation; 2) malicious trademark registration applications; 3) engaging in patent and trademark agent services with behaviors violating laws and administrative regulations and being subject to administrative punishment by the NIPA; 4) submitting false materials or concealing important facts and applying for administrative confirmation; 5) subject to credit commitment being determined to be unreal or failing to perform commitment; 6) acts of being able to perform but refusing to and avoiding to perform administrative punishment, administrative decisions.
The Regulations have 6 chapters and 26 articles. Based on the establishment and improvement of the credit management mechanism of the NIPA, the Regulations standardizes the recognition of dishonest acts, collecting, sharing and disclosing of dishonest information, punishment for dishonesty and credit restoration, etc. The Regulations could strengthen the supervision, which may give full play to the effectiveness of credit supervision, and promotes the construction of credit system in the field of intellectual property.
On September 1, 2021, the Measures for the Administration of the List of Serious Violations and Dishonesty in Market Supervision and Administration (the "Measures") came into force, specifying serious violations and dishonesty in the field of intellectual property. The Measures introduce an unified and standardized list management system for serious breach of laws and dishonesty in the fields of market supervision, quality inspection, food and medicine and intellectual property. The Regulations will be well connected with and implemented in the implementation of the Measures.
Source: China Intellectual Property News
Date: 2022/03/16
ZLWD Commentary：
Currently acts like illegal patent application, the malicious trademark registration applications and the submission of false materials to defraud the expenses to reduce the payment and other violations of good faith still exist. Hence the formulation and promulgation of the Regulations have urgent practical needs.
Recently, the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing made a judgment on the case that LAIYA and NANDA sued Wu and the other five defendants for infringement of "3CE" trademark rights and unfair competition. The court found that the use of the "3CE" logo by the defendants constituted trademark infringement, and found that the defendants had counterfeit acts and false publicity acts such as use same name and logo on packaging and decoration, and ruled that the defendants shall compensate for economic losses and reasonable expenses of RMB 10.4 million.
At the beginning of 2020, LAIYA and its subsidiary NANDA filed trademark infringement and unfair competition lawsuits with the Haidian Court, accusing Wu's company and distributor infringed its trademark by using "3ce" and "3CE" logo, and that Wu registered domain name for 3ce.cc. The plaintiff also alleged that the defendants use similar packaging and decoration on products. The defendants also used NANDA's English name and Korean name “㈜난다”. The plaintiff also accused that the advertising slogan of "since 2004" is a false statement.
The court held that: 1) the plaintiff established the 3CE brand in Korea in 2009 to promote the brand. In 2010, the company launched its products in China , and conducted extensive sales, publicity and promotion for Chinese consumers. Before 2013, "3CE" had formed some influential commodity names protected by anti-unfair competition law. The domain name of 3ce.cc registered by the defendant on June 28, 2013 is identical or similar to the commercial logo claimed by the plaintiff. The defendant did not submit evidence that it had a legitimate interest in 3ce before registering the domain name in question. Therefore it can be seen that the defendant had malicious intent to use the domain name to cause confusion, which constituted unfair competition. The plaintiff submitted plenty of evidence that some consumers mistook the defendant's brand as the plaintiff's brand. Therefore, the defendants' use of "3ce" and "3CE" has reached the consequence of confusing or misleading consumers, constituting trademark infringement; 2) As for the name of the lipstick number, the court held that the defendants used same font and pronunciation on their products, which were exactly the same as the use of the corresponding products of the plaintiff, which may be easily to cause confusion; 3) With regard to the packaging and decoration of the goods, the court held that, compared with the packaging and decoration of the corresponding goods of the plaintiff, the models and colors of the alleged infringing products were almost the same, with only a little color difference, which proved that the positions of the main elements of the label were basically the same, resulting in high similarity in overall appearance and visual effect between the alleged products and the products of the plaintiff.
Finally, the court ordered the defendant to stop the trademark infringement and unfair competition. Given the fact that the defendants own more than 700 shops in the country, and the monthly sales of some shops reached RMB 200,000, while the infringement lasted for a long time, the court ordered the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and reasonable expenses for proection of rights, totaling RMB 10.4 million.
Source: IP Lead
Date: 2022/03/15
ZLWD Commentary：
The number of applications for patents and trademarks in China has been increasing, and the number of intellectual property cases accepted by courts has also increased significantly. Thus it is vital for enterprises nowadays to strengthen the awareness of intellectual property protection and plan the IP strategy ahead.
Recently, through China (Sanya) Intellectual Property Protection Center (CSIPPC)'s fast patent pre-trial service, the first group of four invention patent applications had been quickly authorized by the State Intellectual Property Office. Among those applications, the industrial design patent of "unmanned ship" "ship control deck" that jointly applied by Hainan smart Maritime Technology Co., Ltd accompanied and Sanya Research Institute of Hainan University took only 2 working days to be authorized. It is known that this industrial design patent is the very first patent authorized nationally after CSIPPC was considered acceptance. This authorization symbolled that the Green Pathway of SCIPPC's patent pre-trial service has been successfully opened. Compared to the ordinary industrial design patent authorization process, which usually took 6 to 8 months to complete, the time period of SCIPPC's first patent pre-trial service case has been shortened more than 99%.
CSIPPC will carefully and strictly perform pre-trial, peer-check, quality-check, and other relative operations for the patent cases pass through CSIPPC’s fast patent pre-trial service. In the meantime, SCIPPC will also guide applicants make necessary changes and completions according to the applications they have. Such process will help the patent applications to be initially authorized by the State Intellectual Property Office. That is, the patent has no reason for rejection and no other defects after examination by the State Intellectual Property Office, and no notice of examination or notice of correction was issued.
According to SCIPPC's pre-trial staff member Zhisong Tao, generally, patent applications submitted after being pre-trialed by SCIPPC can enjoy the rapid authorization of the State Intellectual Property Office. The review time of invention patent application has shortened from 20 months to 3 months, from 9 months to 15 days for utility model patent application, 8 months to 7 days for industrial design patent application. At the moment, SCIPPC is able to work on invention, utility model, and industrial design patent applications' pre-trial process; the acceptance of materials of trademark/geographical indication registration and change; infringement determination and dispute mediation of patent, trademark and copyright; early warning & analysis of patent navigation.
Source: Hainan Daily
Date: 2022/03/16
ZLWD Commentary：
SCIPPC is located at Sanya Yazhouwan Bay Technology City. It is the first protection center approved by the State Intellectual Property Office in Hainan free trade port. Scientific research institutes, universities, enterprises and other innovative entities registered in Sanya can file in SCIPPC in advance. After successful file-in, patents that conform to the technical field classification number then could enter the rapid examination process of the State Intellectual Property Office after being pre-trialed by Sanya protection center.
On March 17, 2022, Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the application of the
The Interpretation has 29 articles in total. It specifies the applicable conditions of Article 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law as well as emphasizing "business ethics"; it also specifies the provisions of "counterfeit confusion" in Article 6 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. Moreover, considering the characteristics of rapid renewal and development of technology and business model in the IT industry, the Interpretation strictly grasps the spirit of legislation and competition policy. It summarizes the judicial practice experience in time, makes appropriate specifications of the conditions for the application of the law, provides necessary rules and guidelines for judicial adjudication. At the same time, the Interpretation also leaves room for market self-regulation and technological innovation.
Source: The Supreme People's Court
Date: 2022/03/17
ZLWD Commentary：
The concept of "business ethics" first appeared in Article 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. The new judicial interpretation makes a more detailed interpretation of the concept of "business ethics". The court shall, in consideration with the specific circumstances of the case, the industry rules and/or business practices, subjective state of operators, the choosing intention of trading counterpart, impact on consumers' rights and interests, market competition order and social public interests to judge whether the operator violates business ethics according to law.
On the "March 15 International Consumer Rights Day", the Shanghai Higher People's court heard a criminal case of counterfeiting "Meixin" and other registered trademarks online. The court pronounced a judgment in court and ruled to dismiss the appeal. Earlier, Zhuang was convicted of counterfeiting a registered trademark in the first instance and sentenced to six years and six months in prison and a fine of 14 million Chinese yuan.
Shanghai People's High court of second instance held that without the permission of "Meixin" and other registered trademark owners, Zhuang organized and instructed his accomplice to use the same trademark as the registered trademark involved in the case on the same commodity. Zhuang played a role of decision-making and command. The circumstances are particularly serious, constituting the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks and Zhuang was considered the principal. In terms of sentencing, Zhuang and his criminal gang have large sales scale and high amount involved in this case. More importantly, the infringing commodity involved in the case is moon cake, which is a food with high consumption demand, Zhuang and partners’ behavior endangers the health rights and interests of consumers and has serious social harm, which should be severely punished according to law. In addition, Zhuang is both a principal and a recidivist, and the charges involved in his previous crime are the same as those in this case, both of which are the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, both also involve the "Meixin" brand moon cake in this case. Zhuang still refuses to plead guilty and repent, which shows the depth of subjective malignancy and should be severely punished according to law. Therefore, the above final judgment was made.
Source: Shanghai Higher People's court
Date: 2022/03/15
ZLWD Commentary：
In this case, "Meixin" brand and its goods are widely known in China. Criminal gangs have large sales scale and the amount of money involved is high. It not only causes great losses to the goodwill and economic interests of the obligee, but also breaks the market economic order and public food safety. It brings serious social harm.
On March 2, 2022, the Supreme People's Court issued The Guiding Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Further Strengthening the Criminal Trial involving Seeds (the "Opinion")
There are eight articles in the Opinion. Specific provisions are made from three aspects: strengthening the overall requirements of seed related criminal trial, clarifying the application of relevant laws, and improving the working mechanism. The Opinion requires clarifying the general requirements for strengthening the criminal trial involving seeds, increasing the punishment of seed related crimes such as the production and sale of fake products, the infringement and the destruction of germplasm resources in accordance with the law. It also clarifies the legal application of seed related crimes. By applying the crimes of counterfeiting registered trademarks and infringing trade secrets, which are closely related to the infringement of seeds, we can punish the infringement of seeds according to law.
At the same time, the infringement of seed should be regarded as a heavier punishment, and the punishment of such crimes should be strengthened. It is also important to clarify and improve relevant working mechanisms, in order to strengthen cooperation with relevant departments such as administrative departments, public security and prosecutor authorities.
Source: The Supreme People's Court
Date: 2022/03/02
ZLWD Commentary：
The Opinion makes clear provisions on the legal application of seed related crimes, which is helpful to punish seed related crimes according to law, promote the healthy development of seed industry, comprehensively purify seed industry market and maintain national seed source safety.
The Higher People's Court of Shandong Province made a second instance judgment on a dispute over infringement of trademark rights and unfair competition, and ordered to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment. Previously, the court of first instance ruled that Jucheng company, Jucheng Jinan Branch and Laiwu Chaoyixing fast food restaurant stopped infringing the exclusive trademark right of Chaoyixing company. Jucheng company and Jucheng Jinan Branch shall stop the unfair competition against the decoration that has a certain impact on Chaoyixing company, and jointly compensate Chaoyixing company for its economic losses, including reasonable expenses, totaling 5 million yuan. Lun Zhiguang shall be jointly and severally liable.
The court of second instance held that the Chinese pronunciation of the sued logo "Chaoyixing" and "Chaoyixing" are exactly the same, and the two words are exactly the same, the composition of the two is similar, and the trademark involved has high popularity and reputation in Shandong Province. The defendant arbitrarily used similar trademarks on the catering services with the same service items as the approved service items of the trademark involved, which is easy to cause confusion and misunderstanding of the relevant public and constitute an infringement of the exclusive right to use the trademark involved. In terms of the amount of compensation, the court of second instance held that if the obligee makes a punitive request but the base of punitive compensation cannot be determined, the amount of compensation can be determined by applying the statutory compensation according to the circumstances of the infringement, and the punitive factors such as intentional infringement and serious circumstances can be considered when determining the amount of statutory compensation. In addition, as the actual controller of Jucheng company, Lun Zhiguang manipulates the operation and management of the company. Lun Zhiguang constitutes a joint infringement and should bear joint liability.
Source: Zhi Chan Bao
Date: 2022/03/01
ZLWD Commentary：
The subjective malice of the defendant can be considered as one of the factors when determining the amount of statutory compensation. In this case, after considering punitive factors such as intentional infringement and serious circumstances, the court's second instance determined a higher amount of statutory compensation, which is the embodiment of the "punishment" function of statutory compensation.
Recently, the Market Supervision Bureau of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (Intellectual Property Office) issued the Implementation Plan for the Construction of Patent Navigation Service Base in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.
Source: NIPA
ZLWD Commentary:
With the issuance of the Implementation Plan, the tasks and objectives of the construction of the patent navigation service base in Xinjiang are clarified. Focusing on the region's ten key industries, strategic emerging industries and patent intensive industrial clusters, the region shall clarify the status and trend of regional industry development by using patent analysis, and formulate strategies for regional industrial innovation development and patent layout. Through promoting the construction of patent navigation service bases and their functions, such promotions can effectively play role in patent navigation for industrial and regional development, government investment and other major economic, scientific and technological activities, and further shaping advantages of industrial competition.
This Newsletter is produced by Economic and Legal Development Research Centre for Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area For Your Reference Only.
Editorial Board: Wei LIN，Simon TANG，Lisi ZHOU，Yu DENG，Yuming LI，Oyagi，Gong CHEN，Ning NING，Zhao LIU，Xiaoyun Su
All Information published in this Newsletter is from open source.
If you have any suggestion or need more information, please contact us.
