The State Intellectual Property Office issued the Measures for Dispute Mediation for the Implementation of Patent Open License (Trial)

The Measures for the Mediation of Disputes over the Implementation of Patent Opening licensing (Trial) (hereinafter referred to as the “Trial Measures”) are applicable to disputes over the implementation of the implementation of patent open licensing, including the payment standard and payment method of patent opening licensing royalties, the effective time of patent opening licensing, the patent licensing period of patent licensing and other issues. The general provisions of the Trial Measures stipulate that the implementation of patent open licensing dispute mediation should follow the four principles of voluntary, legality, fairness and confidentiality. The parties concerned shall submit an application for mediation in writing and submit or mail the application to the State Intellectual Property Office.

The Trial Measures stipulates that the acceptance of a mediation case shall be based on the consent of both parties, and if the application, the State Intellectual Property Office shall send a mediation notice to the party of the application to consult the mediation intention. If one party requests for termination in the mediation process, the mediator shall terminate the mediation procedure. The State Intellectual Property Office shall complete the case mediation within 30 working days from the date of accepting the application for mediation. If the circumstances are complicated or under other special circumstances, with the consent of both parties, the extension period may be extended appropriately and shall not exceed 30 working days.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Trial Measures reflects the active exploration of the State Intellectual Property Office in optimizing the patent dispute resolution mechanism. By clarifying the mediation principles and procedures, the Trial Measures aims to provide a more efficient way to solve disputes related to patent licensing and reduce the judicial burden. However, the professionalism of its mediators and the execution of the mediation results remain the key challenges. In practice, the actual effect of the Trial Measures has yet to be observed and further improved.

The State Intellectual Property Office has solicited public opinions on the Measures for Administrative Adjudication and Mediation of Patent Disputes

The draft for soliciting opinions consists of 86 articles, which are divided into five chapters: general provisions, administrative adjudication, administrative mediation, legal liability and supplementary provisions. According to the State Intellectual Property Office, the formulation of the Measures (draft) has extensively solicited opinions from academia, practice and law enforcement departments, and on the basis of summarizing the previous law enforcement practices of patent infringement disputes, refined and improved the procedures and substantive standards for the handling of administrative adjudication and mediation of patent infringement disputes.

The draft aims to further implement the new revision of the Patent Law and implementation rules, and optimize the scope, procedures and system of administrative adjudication and mediation of patent infringement disputes.

The highlights of the draft are as follows: (1) the implementation of the revision content of the patent law, Set up relevant chapters on administrative adjudication of major patent infringement disputes, administrative adjudication of early settlement mechanism of drug patent disputes, and administrative mediation of disputes over patent opening and license implementation; (2) Implement the new Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law to absorb the backbone contents, Refine the delivery of service, To clarify the mediation standards for the mediation of the inventor and designer of the official invention and creation; (3) Citing the relevant contents of Administrative Adjudication Measures on Major Patent Tort Disputes and Administrative Adjudication Measures for Early Resolution Mechanism of Drug Patent Disputes, Clarifying the identification rules and handling provisions in the relevant administrative adjudication cases; (4) Further optimization of case handling norms and procedures, Provisions on the qualifications, jurisdiction, priority jurisdiction and methods of closing cases have been improved.

ZLWD Commentary：

The draft shows the major progress of the State Intellectual Property Office in improving the mechanism for handling patent disputes. Through extensive soliciting opinions and combining with actual law enforcement experience, the draft for soliciting opinions not only implemented the revision content of the new Patent Law, but also made detailed optimization in the standardization of the ruling and mediation procedures. This systematic improvement is expected to improve the efficiency and impartiality of administrative rulings.

The Copyright Association of China signed a strategic cooperation agreement to strengthen cooperation in the field of copyright

The Copyright Association of China and the Copyright Commission of South Korea signed a strategic cooperation agreement in Beijing on the afternoon of July 17, aiming to strengthen bilateral exchanges and cooperation and communication protection in the field of copyright. According to the agreement, the two sides will establish a long-term exchange mechanism based on the principles of equality and mutual benefit, complementary advantages, information sharing and common development. 

The specific contents include: in terms of communication and cooperation, communication and cooperation will be carried out for the distribution of high-quality copyright content, including music, film, animation, literature, games, art and other fields to promote mutual communication and cooperation in the protection of copyright content; the parties will establish exchange and cooperation mechanisms, such as exchanging high-level copyright delegations with other copyright administrative organs, industry associations, copyright related enterprises and research and academic institutions.

ZLWD Commentary：

The strategic cooperation agreement between the Copyright Association of China and the Copyright Commission of South Korea marks the further deepening of the cooperation between China and South Korea in the field of copyright protection and communication. The move will not only help promote the exchange and legitimate protection of high-quality copyrighted content between the two countries, but also provide a broad space for diversified cooperation in the field of copyright. The two sides will further strengthen their position in the global copyright market through the establishment of a long-term exchange mechanism, especially the in-depth cooperation in the fields of music, film and television. However, the actual effect of the agreement will depend on the coordination and implementation of both parties in the specific implementation.

Beijing Intellectual Property Court concluded the country's first case of unfair competition involving the data intellectual property registration certificate

In this case, the plaintiff, Beijing Digital XX Company, released the "AI Data Open Source Plan 1505 hours of Chinese Mandarin Voice Data" in 2021, collected voice data, and obtained the 2023000007 "Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate" in 2023. Shanghai Yin Company is a technology company that provides data storage, labeling and training services. After obtaining the 200 hours subset of the 1505 hours of data set through illegal means, it disclosed it to network users as the service content of the official website of the company "Gu Titanium" and provided download links. In 2021, Beijing Digital Company filed a lawsuit in the Beijing Internet Court, claiming that the company infringed on the data property rights, copyright and trade secrets of the company, and constituted unfair competition.

The Beijing Internet Court of first instance ruled the infringement of commercial secrets. Hidden a company against the decision, filed an appeal. Recently, the Beijing intellectual property court ruled, that although the data set involved is neither originality, also in the infringement happened by the number so-and-so company active public and loss of secret, cannot get copyright and trade secrets protection, but the number of so-and-so company in the process of legal collection sound data entry paid substantial technology, capital, manpower, material resources, on the original data with more commercial value, constitute a competitive rights and interests. At the same time, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court determined that the "Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate" involved in the case could not only be used as a prima facie evidence to prove that the company enjoys the property interests related to the involved data set, but also as a prima facie evidence of the data set collection behavior or legal data source. The court pointed out that the behavior of the company violated the rules for the use of the open source agreement, damaged the legitimate rights and interests of the company and the interests of consumers, disturbed the competition order of the data service market, and also constituted unfair competition behavior. Finally, the court determined that the amount of 100,000 yuan awarded by the first-instance court was appropriate.

ZLWD Commentary：

The case heard by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court is of pioneering significance, marking an important step forward in China's legal practice in the field of data rights protection. By identifying the competitive rights and interests of data, the court has recognized the investment and value creation of enterprises in data collection and processing, which provides a new legal basis for the protection of data assets. At the same time, the court also confirmed the Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate as a preliminary evidence of the legal data source, further enhancing the legal effect of data registration. However, how to balance the contradiction between data disclosure and rights and interests protection in the future practice is still a problem that the legal community needs to continue to explore.

The Standing Committee of the People's Congress of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region voted to pass the Regulations on Intellectual Property Protection and Promotion of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region

On July 25, the 10th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 14th People's Congress of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region voted to pass the Regulations on the Protection and Promotion of Intellectual Property Rights of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which is scheduled to take effect on October 1.

The Regulations emphasize the construction of a mechanism for rapid collaborative protection of intellectual property rights and improve the diversified dispute resolution mechanism. In terms of traditional culture and industries, the Regulations stipulate that the intellectual property departments of the people's governments at or above the county level should cooperate with relevant departments to strengthen the protection and application of intellectual property in traditional industries and cultural fields such as traditional Chinese medicine, time-honored brands and intangible cultural heritage, so as to realize inheritance and innovative development.

It is particularly noteworthy that the Regulations further promote the establishment of intellectual property protection rules in new areas and new forms of business. The competent intellectual property department of the people's government of the Autonomous Region will establish a data intellectual property protection mechanism with relevant departments, explore the registration of data intellectual property, and protect the intellectual property rights formed in the collection, storage, processing and use of data in accordance with the law, so as to promote the realization of its value. The Regulations also support enterprises and institutions to establish intellectual property protection models in new-generation information technology, artificial intelligence, aerospace, new energy, new materials, high-end equipment, biomedicine and quantum technology.

In addition, the Regulations also refine and improve the intellectual property protection rules for e-commerce, exhibitions and trade secrets, and support Guangxi to expand the openness and cooperation in intellectual property, expand channels for foreign exchanges and cooperation, and build an international platform for intellectual property opening and cooperation. This initiative will help Guangxi to integrate with the international standards in intellectual property protection and promote the innovation and development of regional economy.

ZLWD Commentary：

The adoption of the Regulations marks a solid step forward in Guangxi in the field of intellectual property protection. The Regulations not only emphasize the construction of a rapid and coordinated protection of intellectual property rights and a diversified dispute resolution mechanism, but also make innovative provisions on intellectual property protection in traditional culture and emerging fields. In particular, the protection of data intellectual property rights and the support for new business forms show Guangxi's keen grasp of the future development of science and technology. In addition, the Regulations promote international cooperation and opening-up, and help Guangxi's integration into the global intellectual property system.

Guiyang Intellectual Property Court was officially established, which is the first specialized intellectual property judicial institution in Guizhou Province

On July 28th, Guiyang Intellectual Property Court was officially inaugurated in Guiyang Big Data Science and Technology Innovation City Computing Power Center. The intellectual property court is the third listed intellectual property court in southwest China, and also the only specialized intellectual property judicial institution in Guizhou Province.

Case jurisdiction, Guiyang intellectual property court is responsible for the jurisdiction in the jurisdiction of invention patent, utility model patent, plant varieties, integrated circuit layout design, technical secrets, computer software ownership, infringement disputes and monopoly disputes first intellectual property civil and administrative cases, and in Guiyang city jurisdiction except outside the jurisdiction of the grassroots court of first intellectual property civil, administrative and criminal cases, at the same time to accept the parties refuses to accept the county people's court of first instance judgment or ruling, can appeal in accordance with the law of intellectual property rights civil and administrative second instance cases.

ZLWD Commentary：

The establishment of the Guiyang Intellectual Property Court is an important milestone in the intellectual property protection system of Guizhou Province. As the first institution in the province to handle intellectual property cases, this court not only fills the gap in the field of intellectual property adjudication in Guizhou, but also strengthens the legal protection of intellectual property protection in the province. Its broad jurisdiction, including complex cases such as invention patents, computer software and monopoly disputes, suggests that the court will shoulder the responsibility of protecting innovation and combating infringement.

Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court: The limited personalized selection and permutation combination of product name, efficacy description and other contents do not meet the requirements of originality, and we cannot obtain copyright protection

This case is a case of copyright infringement of product packaging design. As the operator of the A company, Xiao Ming designed the outer packaging for the nasal spray produced by the company, and completed the copyright registration of the art works in February 2023. Soon after, Xiao Ming found that the nasal spray packaging sold by B company on the same e-commerce platform was highly similar to its design. Xiao Ming believed that B company had violated the right of reproduction, distribution and information network transmission of his art works, so he filed a lawsuit to the court. B company argued that the box and bottle involved common pattern and shape for the market, not original, the text on the label is the conventional expression of product information, mainly used to consumers product source and function, design part to consumers product use and use, is also the public existing works simple piece together, also does not have originality, so does not constitute a copyright infringement.

After hearing the trial, the court held that although Xiao Ming's fine art works were personalized and arranged in the element arrangement, they did not reach the creative height required by the copyright law. Xiao Ming also failed to provide evidence such as his manuscript to prove the originality of his work. Therefore, the court ruled that Xiao Ming's works did not belong to the works stipulated in the Copyright Law, and rejected all his claims.

The court finally pointed out that the copyright law protects the original intellectual achievements, and the originality is the prerequisite for the works to obtain the copyright protection. China implements a voluntary registration system for works. The registration authorities only examine the application documents submitted by the applicant, and the people's court needs to conduct substantive examination of the source of the works, the creation process and the originality of the works in the trial. The specific key points of the review include the bottomless manuscript or the original, the way of publication, the original author's thoughts or the aesthetic meaning contained in the work.

ZLWD Commentary：

The judgment of Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court on the copyright case of product packaging design emphasizes the core position of originality in copyright protection. The court clearly pointed out that only the limited personalized arrangement and combination of the product name, efficacy description and other contents is not enough to constitute the originality in the sense of copyright law, so it is not protected. The ruling conveys strict standards for copyright protection, requiring works to have a certain creative height, rather than a simple patchwork of elements. For creators, this case reminds them that in pursuing copyright protection, they must ensure unique creativity and originality in order to gain legal recognition.

The State Bureau of China issued the Guiding Opinions on Comprehensively Improving the Efficiency of Intellectual Property Public Service

The Opinions clarified the basic principles of "four principles", namely, serving the overall situation, focusing on key points, serving the whole chain, paying equal attention to inclusive services and key services, and set the goal of improving the benefit of enterprises and the people and supporting major scientific and technological innovation. In particular, " on the basis of continuously strengthening inclusive services for enterprises and the people, we should make greater efforts to strengthen public service support for scientific and technological innovation and the development of a modern industrial system.”

Furthermore, in the four aspects of supporting high quality creation, high efficiency application, high standard protection and promoting the quality and efficiency of public services, Put forward a total of 13 specific specific specific measures, Including: strengthening the key breakthrough services for scientific and technological innovation, Supporting key and core technologies and industrial innovation and development; Focus on patent transformation, Jointly promote the industrialization of intellectual property rights, Promote the transformation and application of existing patents in universities and scientific research institutions; Improve the co-governance and management, Underpin the high standards of intellectual property protection, Including strengthening the construction of demonstration zones for intellectual property rights protection, Optimize the supply of public services; Strengthen classified guidance, Improve the operation efficiency of public service agencies, Forming a working pattern with clear responsibilities and complementary advantages; And to strengthen the construction of the public service personnel team, Improve the accuracy and effectiveness of services.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Guidance on Comprehensively Improving the Efficiency of Intellectual Property Public Services issued by the State Information Bureau of China shows that China's public services in the field of intellectual property are becoming more refined and efficient. By clarifying the principle of "four principles", the Opinions emphasize the dual goals of serving the whole chain, balancing universal benefits and key services, reflecting the strong support for scientific and technological innovation and industrial development. In particular, the 13 specific measures proposed, such as strengthening key technologies, promoting patent transformation, and optimizing service supply, not only provide a solid guarantee for scientific and technological innovation, but also lay a foundation for the all-round protection of intellectual property rights.

The Chinese National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has adjusted certain patent fee standards and reduction policies.

The CNIPA has adjusted some patent fee standards and reduction policies as per the “Notice on Adjusting and Optimizing Patent Fee Policies” (Cai Shui [2024] No. 23) and the “Notice on Matters Concerning Patent Term Compensation Fee Standards” (Fa Gai Jia Ge [2024] No. 1156) from the Ministry of Finance and the National Development and Reform Commission:

1. Patent holders who request a patent term compensation must pay a compensation request fee of 200 yuan per item. If the request is approved, a compensation period annual fee of 8,000 yuan per year per item is applicable; fees are not charged for incomplete years.

2. Patent annuity fees are reduced by 15% during the period of open patent licensing. If other patent fee reduction policies also apply, the most favorable policy can be chosen, but benefits cannot be combined.

3. For international design applications entering China through the Hague Agreement on the International Registration of Industrial Designs, the first and second individual designation fees can be reduced according to the relevant regulations in the “Notice on Issuing the Patent Fee Reduction Measures” (Cai Shui [2016] No. 78), the “Notice on Policies Regarding the Suspension, Exemption, and Adjustment of Certain Administrative Fees” (Cai Shui [2018] No. 37), and the “Notice on Policies Regarding the Reduction and Exemption of Certain Administrative Fees” (Cai Shui [2019] No. 45).

4. If a bulk request is made for changes in bibliographic items (such as the name of the applicant or patent holder) without involving a transfer of rights, only a single change fee needs to be paid.

5. The footnote in Annex 2 of the “Notice on the Reissuance of Administrative Fee Standards by the State Intellectual Property Office” (Fa Gai Jia Ge [2017] No. 270) has been revised. The footnote now states that international patent applications (PCT applications) filed through the State Intellectual Property Office as the receiving office, and entering the national phase in China, are exempt from the application fee and additional application fee. PCT applications for which the State Intellectual Property Office conducts an international search report or preliminary patentability report are exempt from the substantive examination fee when entering the national phase and requesting a substantive examination. Other fees related to PCT applications entering the national phase will follow domestic fee standards.

6. Fees collected by the State Intellectual Property Office on behalf of the World Intellectual Property Organization and other countries and regions will be charged according to the agreements between the State Intellectual Property Office and these organizations, countries, and regions, or as per relevant international treaties.

ZLWD Commentary：

The adjustments to some patent fee standards and the implementation of reduction policies by the State Intellectual Property Office aim to lower innovation costs, enhance patent protection awareness, optimize resource allocation, support small and micro enterprises, and encourage international patent applications. These measures are intended to promote social innovation and international intellectual property cooperation, creating a more equitable and efficient innovation environment.

The CNIPA Issues the “2024 Classification System for Patents Related to the ‘New Three’ Technologies”

In recent years, exports of China's "New Three" products—electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaic products—have grown significantly, driving a steady increase in China's foreign trade scale and continued optimization of trade structure. To serve the innovative development of China’s foreign trade, strengthen the correlation analysis between patents related to the "New Three" technologies and economic activities, and foster new advantages in international cooperation and competition, the State Intellectual Property Office has compiled the “2024 Classification System for Patents Related to the ‘New Three’ Technologies.”

This classification system divides the "New Three" related technologies into four levels, including three first-level categories: electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaics. Electric vehicles include four second-level categories such as complete vehicle manufacturing, device and accessory manufacturing, related facility manufacturing, and related services, with eight third-level and four fourth-level subcategories. Lithium batteries include five second-level categories such as cathode materials, anode materials, electrolytes, separators, and battery modules (PACK), with 17 third-level and six fourth-level subcategories. Photovoltaics include four second-level categories such as polycrystalline silicon, monocrystalline silicon, solar cells, and photovoltaic modules, with 16 third-level subcategories. A total of 687 relationships were established between these technology branches and the International Patent Classification, involving five sections, 15 main classes, 28 subclasses, 91 main groups, and 1,992 subgroups of the International Patent Classification.

ZLWD Commentary：

The release of the “2024 Classification System for Patents Related to the ‘New Three’ Technologies” holds significant importance for promoting the patent statistics monitoring and international comparative analysis of emerging fields in China's foreign trade, supporting the innovative development of foreign trade, advancing the construction of a modern industrial system, and enhancing the protection and utilization of intellectual property. This will help China gain a more advantageous position in global technological competition.

The CNIPA Issues the “Guidelines on Priority Right Restoration, Priority Right Addition, or Correction”

The revised “Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China” introduced a system for priority right restoration and priority right addition or correction. The revised “Patent Examination Guidelines” have further detailed these systems, with the relevant provisions coming into effect on January 20, 2024. The new system provides applicants with more effective remedies regarding priority right deadlines and procedural handling and aligns with the rules related to international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). 

The State Intellectual Property Office issued the “Guidelines on Priority Right Restoration, Priority Right Addition, or Correction” to introduce the background, applicable conditions, processing procedures, typical cases, and other specific content of the system. This is intended to guide innovators to accurately understand and use the system, improve the quality of patent application procedures, and promote high-quality development in the patent field.

ZLWD Commentary：

The issuance of the “Guidelines on Priority Right Restoration, Priority Right Addition, or Correction” not only improves the intellectual property legal and policy framework, enhances the quality of patent application procedures, and promotes alignment with international rules, but also provides more clear and specific legal guidance for innovators, fostering high-quality development in China’s patent field.

Shenzhen to Centralize Jurisdiction of First-instance Foreign-related, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan IP Cases to Futian Court Starting This Month

From August 1, 2024, first-instance civil, administrative (including non-litigation administrative review), and criminal cases related to intellectual property that involve foreign parties, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan and should be handled by basic-level people's courts in Shenzhen will be uniformly accepted by the Futian District People's Court. At the same time, other basic-level people's courts in the city will no longer accept such cases. Cases filed before August 1, 2024, by other basic-level courts that have not yet been concluded will continue to be handled by the original court. If a party has submitted litigation or application materials but has not yet filed a case, the original court will still accept and handle it.

ZLWD Commentary：

The centralization of first-instance foreign-related, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan intellectual property cases in Shenzhen to the Futian Court aims to strengthen the specialization and efficiency of cross-border IP trials, enhance judicial credibility, provide solid judicial protection for technological innovation and industrial development, optimize judicial resource allocation, and promote legal cooperation in the Greater Bay Area. This is part of the effort to create a world-class legal business environment.