The Beijing High People's Court issued seven typical cases involving the protection of intellectual property rights in fine traditional Chinese culture

In order to thoroughly implement the decisions and arrangements of the Party Central Committee and the State Council on comprehensively strengthening intellectual property protection, unify law enforcement standards, and standardize the calculation of illegal operating amounts, the "Measures for Calculating the Illegal Operating Amount in Trademark Infringement Cases" have been formulated according to the "Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China", the "Implementing Regulations of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China", and other regulations.

The "Measures for Calculating the Illegal Operating Amount in Trademark Infringement Cases" apply to trademark administrative law enforcement departments when dealing with trademark infringement cases where the party's conduct has been deemed to constitute trademark infringement. According to Article 5 of these measures, the value of infringing goods that have been sold is calculated based on the actual sales price. 

The value of infringing goods that have not been sold is calculated based on the average actual sales price of the infringing goods that have been identified; if the average actual sales price cannot be ascertained, it is calculated based on the listed price of the infringing goods. If the actual sales price cannot be ascertained or the infringing goods are not priced, it is calculated based on the market median price of the infringed goods during the infringement period. For goods that have been manufactured but have not yet been affixed with infringing registered trademark logos, if there is conclusive and sufficient evidence to prove that the goods will infringe upon the exclusive right to use a registered trademark of others, their value shall be included in the illegal operating amount.

ZLWD Commentary：

The typical cases released by the Beijing High People's Court highlight the legal adaptability and challenges of intellectual property protection for traditional culture in the digital age. Through the ruling on the copyright dispute over panoramic images of the Forbidden City, the court emphasized the need for more detailed and forward-looking definitions of intellectual property when traditional culture intersects with modern technology. This underscores the judiciary's adaptability in protecting cultural digitization and reflects how the law can effectively support the dissemination and protection of outstanding Chinese traditional culture amidst the increasing number of digital cultural products.

The Office of the Inter-Ministerial Joint Conference on Building China into a Strong Intellectual Property Nation has released the "Development Report on the Construction of an Intellectual Property Power (2024)"

The Outline for Building a Strong Intellectual Property Nation (2021–2035) and the 14th Five-Year National Plan for Intellectual Property Protection and Utilization set a series of key targets for intellectual property development in China during the 14th Five-Year Plan period. According to the Development Report on the Construction of an Intellectual Property Power (2024), eight anticipated indicators showed significant growth or remained at high levels in 2023, demonstrating overall smooth progress. These indicators include:  

1. Number of high-value invention patents per 10,000 people (units).  

2. Number of overseas invention patents granted (in 10,000 units).  

3. Registered amount of intellectual property pledge financing (in 100 million RMB).  

4. Annual total imports and exports of intellectual property royalties (in 100 million RMB).  

5. Added value of patent-intensive industries as a proportion of GDP (%).  

6. Added value of copyright industries as a proportion of GDP (%).  

7. Public satisfaction with intellectual property protection (score).  

8. Rate of settlement of first-instance civil intellectual property cases without appeal (%).

ZLWD Commentary：

The Development Report on the Construction of an Intellectual Property Power (2024) showcases China's steady progress in the field of intellectual property, particularly with significant growth in patent numbers, pledge financing, and the contribution of the copyright industry. This not only reflects the effectiveness of policies but also enhances China's position in global intellectual property competition. However, with the changing international environment, maintaining these achievements and further advancing the practical application and protection of intellectual property will remain key to future development.

The National Intellectual Property Administration (NIPA) and the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) jointly released the "Calculation Method for the Illegal Operating Amount in Trademark Infringement Cases"

According to the "Calculation Method for the Illegal Operating Amount in Trademark Infringement Cases" (hereinafter referred to as the "Calculation Method"), the illegal operating amount refers to the total value of the infringing goods or the revenue generated from sales due to the trademark infringement. In principle, for infringing goods that have been sold, the value is calculated based on the actual sale price. For unsold infringing goods, the value is calculated based on the actual average sale price of the infringing goods, the marked price, or the market intermediate price during the infringement period, in order of priority.

In addition to general cases, the "Calculation Method" also specifies how to calculate the illegal operating amount in certain special cases, such as processing and contracting activities that include both labor and materials, free gifts, refurbished goods, and spare parts infringements. While generally adhering to the above basic principles, the method also clarifies specific calculations for such cases. For example, in processing and contracting activities, if the infringing goods are not priced separately, their value can be calculated based on their proportion in the overall activity. For free gifts, the calculation is based on their actual purchase price or manufacturing cost.

ZLWD Commentary：

The release of the "Calculation Method for the Illegal Operating Amount in Trademark Infringement Cases" provides clearer and more detailed standards for calculating compensation in trademark infringement cases, particularly by specifying methods for determining the illegal operating amount in special circumstances. This initiative helps enhance the transparency and fairness of handling trademark infringement cases, ensuring that compensation amounts are more reasonable and accurate. As e-commerce and cross-border transactions continue to grow, the relevant calculation methods will also need to adapt further to the evolving dynamics of emerging markets and technologies.

The Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court has released a case analysis on "The Impact of Patent Assignment on the Litigation Subject Qualification and Claims of the Original Patent Holder in Patent Infringement Lawsuits"

In the case (2022) Supreme Court Intellectual Property Civil Final No. 1923, the Supreme People's Court clarified that if a patent assignment occurs during a patent infringement lawsuit, the original patent holder's qualification as the plaintiff is not affected. If it is determined that the defendant has infringed on the patent, the court should support the original patent holder's request to stop the infringement, unless the defendant can prove that they have obtained authorization from the assignee of the patent.

In this case, the plaintiff Chen obtained the patent authorization for the involved patent on January 4, 2019, and claimed that a certain technology company in Shenzhen had infringed on his utility model patent rights by selling and promising to sell a product without his permission. However, after the first trial, the patent holder was changed from Chen to Wang, a third party. As a result, the first-instance court, while finding that the Shenzhen technology company had infringed on the involved patent, refused to support Chen's request to order the company to cease the infringement, on the grounds that Chen was no longer the patent holder.

After reviewing the case, the Supreme People's Court clarified that, according to Article 249 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, when a patent is transferred during a patent infringement lawsuit, the original patent holder’s qualification as the plaintiff is not affected. The final judgment of the case is binding on the patent assignee. If the court finds patent infringement, it should, in accordance with the law, support the original patent holder's request for the defendant to cease the infringement, unless the defendant can prove that they have obtained authorization from the patent assignee. In this case, although the patent holder was changed from Chen to Wang after the first trial, the court should not deny Chen's request to stop the infringement solely because of the change in the patent holder. Instead, the court should apply Article 249 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, treating all of Chen's claims, actions, and consequences as also applying to Wang, to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the patent holder and ensure the smooth progress of the litigation.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Supreme Peoples Court has clearly explained the impact of patent right transfer in infringement litigation, emphasizing that even after the transfer of patent right, the original patentee can continue to be the subject of litigation, and maintain its request to stop infringement. This judgment enhances the stability and continuity of litigation, avoids the interruption or complexity of litigation proceedings caused by the transfer of rights, and helps to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the original patentee. This decision also reminds us that when the transfer of patent rights involves, the court needs to carefully consider the licensing situation between the transferor and the transferee to ensure that the defendants legal right of defense is not affected.

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court issued a white paper on ten-year trials, accepted more than 200,000 cases

On November 6, Beijing intellectual property court issued "Beijing intellectual property court ten years trial work white paper (2014-2024)" (hereinafter referred to as "white paper"), the white paper, the white paper in November 2014 to October 2024, Beijing intellectual property court accepted 201984 cases, 195506 cases, covering patent, trademark, copyright, unfair competition and monopoly and other fields of intellectual property, of which 75 cases by the Supreme Peoples Court for typical cases of intellectual property protection. 

By optimizing the allocation of judicial resources, Beijing Intellectual Property Court has concluded the 46% of the relatively simple cases and formed the multi-level technical fact finding mechanism of the collegial panel of technical cases; By exploring the reform and electronic files, the online filing rate exceeds 91%, and the electronic service coverage rate ranks first in Beijing Court. Beijing Intellectual Property Court attaches great importance to personnel training, with many trial experts and model cases; properly handle more than 36,000 foreign-related intellectual property cases, involving more than 100 countries and regions, foreign-related cases accounted for nearly 20%.

ZLWD Commentary：

The ten years of adjudication practice at the Beijing Intellectual Property Court not only demonstrate a significant improvement in its case-handling capabilities but also highlight its critical role in judicial protection of intellectual property. By optimizing resource allocation and improving case resolution efficiency, the court has successfully managed a large volume of intellectual property cases. Notably, the adoption of specialized lay judges in technical cases underscores the court’s strong focus on accurately ascertaining technical facts. This multi-layered mechanism of innovation has not only enhanced judicial fairness but also increased transparency and efficiency in litigation processes.

Moreover, with the advancement of full-process digitization reforms, the court has made substantial efforts to improve case handling efficiency and convenience. Its efficient resolution of foreign-related cases, in particular, has solidified its position as a key player in the global intellectual property protection system.

The 12 Provincial and municipal Intellectual Property Administrative Protection Cooperation Conference was held in Chongqing

On November 7, the Intellectual Property Administrative Protection Cooperation Conference of twelve provinces and municipalities was held in Chongqing. At the meeting, 160 intellectual property infringement leads were transferred on-site, and the third batch of key trademark protection lists (359 items) and the second batch of key geographical indication protection lists (222 items) were announced.

To deepen regional cooperation in intellectual property administrative protection and strengthen law enforcement mutual assistance, regulatory interaction, information sharing, and resource connectivity among provinces and municipalities, the Intellectual Property Administrative Protection Cooperation Mechanism was established in 2019 in Shanghai. Chongqing, along with Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Shandong, Guangdong, Sichuan, Hubei, Zhejiang, and Anhui are participants in the mechanism.

These twelve provinces and municipalities are located in key regions such as the Yangtze River Economic Belt, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, which are among the most economically dynamic, open, and innovative areas in China. These regions also have the highest concentration of intellectual property industries in the country. Over the past five years, the collaboration among the intellectual property departments of these twelve provinces and municipalities has deepened, institutionalizing regional protection work exchanges, normalizing the transfer of infringement leads, and frequently coordinating case investigations. This has led to significant progress and results, playing an increasingly important role in regional intellectual property protection cooperation.

Last year, the intellectual property offices of the twelve provinces and municipalities signed the "Memorandum of Cooperation on the Establishment of the Intellectual Property Administrative Protection Alliance of Twelve Provinces and Municipalities to Optimize the National Innovation and Entrepreneurship Unified Market" in Guangdong, further upgrading the cooperation objectives. The scope of cooperation was expanded to cover the entire intellectual property protection chain and fields, including fast-tracking rights acquisition, law enforcement coordination, protection in new fields, mediation and rights protection, transaction transformation, and overseas protection. By leveraging administrative protection functions, this cooperation effectively safeguards the rights of stakeholders and consumers within the region, helps create a fair competitive business environment, and actively supports the development of intellectual property-intensive industries and regional brand economies.

ZLWD Commentary：

The convening of the Intellectual Property Administrative Protection Cooperation Conference of twelve provinces and municipalities marks a further deepening of regional cooperation in intellectual property protection. Through regular transfers of infringement leads and the release of key protection lists, the local intellectual property offices have established a closely knit cooperation network, achieving significant results in combating infringement and protecting innovative outcomes. The content of the meeting also highlights that, with the expansion of cooperation, regional intellectual property protection will become more comprehensive, covering a wider range of fields, from fast-tracking rights acquisition to overseas protection. The continuous improvement of the cooperation mechanism provides strong support for creating a fair competitive market environment.

Beijing issued the Implementation Plan on Strengthening the Administrative Adjudication of Patent Tort Disputes in the New Era

Recently, the Beijing Intellectual Property Office and the Beijing Judicial Bureau jointly issued the "Implementation Plan on Strengthening Administrative Adjudication of Patent Infringement Disputes in the New Era" (hereinafter referred to as the "Implementation Plan"). This plan outlines the framework for improving the administrative adjudication system for patent infringement disputes at both the city and district levels, and explores the establishment of intellectual property administrative adjudication courts, providing service and support for the development of new productive forces in the capital.

The Implementation Plan sets phased goals for the city's patent infringement dispute administrative adjudication work, with specific targets for 2025 and 2030. By 2030, it aims for a smoothly operating adjudication system, significantly improved levels of rule of law and convenience, and a pattern of administrative adjudication that is aligned with the capital's economic and social development in the new era.

The Implementation Plan includes seven key areas with 24 tasks, covering aspects such as strengthening rule of law guarantees, strictly fulfilling duties according to the law, improving case handling efficiency, innovating work mechanisms, enhancing capacity building, and organizing support.

Moving forward, the Beijing Intellectual Property Office will work with the Beijing Judicial Bureau to ensure the implementation of the tasks outlined in the Implementation Plan, strengthening supervision, guidance, and inspection of district-level work, enhancing publicity and outreach, and comprehensively reinforcing the administrative adjudication system for patent infringement disputes in the new era.

ZLWD Commentary：

The "Implementation Plan" provides a clear development blueprint for administrative adjudication of patent infringement disputes, particularly emphasizing high standards for rule of law and convenience, as well as setting phase goals for 2030. It showcases the capital's foresight and determination in the field of intellectual property protection. The implementation of this plan will help improve the handling mechanisms for intellectual property disputes, enhance case processing efficiency, and provide strong legal support for economic and social development, particularly in the areas of strengthening rule of law guarantees, innovating work mechanisms, and building capacity.

The CNIPA has released the Guidelines for the Operation and Management of Trademark Business Acceptance Windows

To implement the Outline for Building an Intellectual Property Powerhouse (2021–2035) issued by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council, along with the 14th Five-Year Plan for the CNIPA Protection and Utilization, and to maximize the role of trademark business acceptance windows while enhancing service quality and efficiency, the CNIPA has published the Guidelines for the Operation and Management of Trademark Business Acceptance Windows.

The Guidelines for the Operation and Management of Trademark Business Acceptance Windows define the purpose, establishment procedures, and management responsibilities of these windows. They also outline the business guidance, training, quality oversight, and dynamic adjustment mechanisms provided by the Trademark Office. Furthermore, the guidelines encourage offering tailored services, promoting collaboration, and improving public service standards. Provincial intellectual property administrations are mandated to oversee management responsibilities, ensuring that the windows operate in a standardized and efficient manner.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Guidelines for the Operation and Management of Trademark Business Acceptance Windows seek to standardize the establishment, operation, and management of these windows, enhance service quality and efficiency, and drive improvements in trademark business acceptance services.

The Riyadh Treaty on Designs has been successfully adopted

From November 11 to 22, the Diplomatic Conference for the Conclusion of a Treaty on Designs, organized by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), took place in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. During the conference, the Riyadh Treaty on Designs was successfully adopted. The Chinese government delegation—comprising representatives from the CNIPA, China’s Permanent Mission to Geneva, and the Chinese Embassy in Saudi Arabia—actively participated under the leadership of Lu Pengqi, Deputy Commissioner of CNIPA. The delegation played a constructive role in the negotiations, contributing significantly to the treaty's adoption and advancing the global intellectual property governance system towards fairness and equity.

Negotiations for the Treaty on Designs spanned nearly two decades before reaching a consensus. The treaty seeks to harmonize and standardize design application procedures and requirements across nations, covering aspects such as application documentation, representation, determination of filing dates, grace periods, amendments or divisions, publication, renewal, time-limit relief, and reinstatement of rights. It aims to provide designers with more accessible, efficient, and cost-effective protection for their designs both domestically and internationally.

ZLWD Commentary：

The conclusion of this treaty represents a significant achievement by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in the field of intellectual property, contributing to the promotion of a more just and reasonable global intellectual property governance system.

The CNIPA and the Office of the State Administration for Market Regulation have jointly issued a notice to strengthen and advance credit supervision in the field of intellectual property

To thoroughly implement the directives of the Party Central Committee and the State Council, as well as the resolutions from the Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China emphasizing the improvement of the social credit system and regulatory mechanisms, NIPA and SAMR have jointly issued the Notice on Improving Credit Regulation in the Field of Intellectual Property (the "Notice"). The document outlines ten specific measures aimed at enhancing credit regulation within the intellectual property domain.

The Notice specifies measures across several key areas. For credit information collection, a robust framework should be established, including local catalogs and management standards for intellectual property credit information. Regarding credit commitments, a comprehensive system must be implemented, with enhanced post-commitment supervision. Actions such as breaching commitments or submitting false information will be categorized as dishonest behavior under legal provisions.

In hierarchical and categorized regulation, tailored evaluation systems for intellectual property credit should be developed locally, supporting systematic credit evaluations. For credit constraints and incentives, legal mechanisms will enforce both penalties for dishonesty and rewards for integrity, with cross-departmental and cross-regional coordination to deter recurring dishonest practices. Platforms like the National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System and the Credit China website will be utilized to incentivize entities with good credit records.

Credit repair processes will also be facilitated, providing dishonest entities with pathways to rectify their records. In key areas, regulatory efforts will focus on deliberate intellectual property infringements, with violators listed in serious illegal and dishonest blacklists per legal requirements.

The issuance of the Notice will guide local authorities in advancing credit regulation in the intellectual property sector, fostering strengthened protection mechanisms and cultivating a fair, competitive, honest, and legally compliant market environment.

ZLWD Commentary：

The issuance of the "Notice on Improving Credit Regulation in the Field of Intellectual Property" has a positive impact on improving the credit regulation system in the intellectual property field, enhancing the level of intellectual property protection, creating a fair competitive market environment, promoting the construction of the social credit system, enhancing the sense of gain for market entities, and driving the development of local intellectual property work.

The AIPPI World Intellectual Property Congress has officially adopted the 2024 AIPPI Hangzhou Resolution

On November 12, 2024, the Executive Committee of the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) approved the 2024 AIPPI Hangzhou Resolution, which was subsequently published on the AIPPI website. The resolution addresses four key research topics: International Coordination of Disclosure Requirements and Consequences of Non-Compliance, Conflicts Involving Composite Marks Containing Non-Distinctive Elements, Parody as a Defense in Copyright Law, and Baseless Allegations of Intellectual Property Infringement. These topics span patents, trademarks, copyrights, and the enforcement of rights.

ZLWD Commentary：

The four research topics in the "2024 AIPPI Hangzhou Resolution" are of great significance in promoting international coordination and cooperation, clarifying the scope of trademark protection, protecting the legitimate rights and interests of copyright owners, curbing malicious infringement allegations, and driving the development of the intellectual property field.