作者：欧修平 尹吉 金杜律师事务所争议解决部
我国《民法通则》第一百三十五条规定，“向人民法院请求保护民事权利的诉讼时效期间为二年，法律另有规定的除外。”第一百三十七条规定，“诉讼时效期间从知 道或者应当知道权利被侵害时起计算。”在职务发明奖励报酬纠纷中，在诉讼时效的起算点问题上存在诸多争议，问题的实质即归结于如何认定职务发明人“知道或 者应当知道权利被侵害”。
全文阅读，请点击此处。
职务发明奖励报酬纠纷中的约定优先原则
“互联网+”时代：知识产权跨界保护探讨
2014年8月，知名网络大神方想的《不败王座》一字未写，就被37游戏以高达810万元的价格拍得其手游改编权。知识产权的重要性不言而喻，这不只关乎到版权问题，更为关键的是版权该如何界定。在我们过去认知中版权很好区分，电视是电视，网络是网络，传统知识产权管理的类型（专利，商业秘密，商标，域名，著作权）也易于辨别。
传统知识产权客体的载体是有形的，在知识产权的确认、授权、处分、转移、保护等诸多环节中，这些有形载体的存在发挥了重要作用。但在网络空间，知识产权的载体表现为数字信息，人们可感知的只是数据和影像。如果说知识产权客体的无形性已经给知识产权侵权的认定与保护带来了较之有形财产权复杂得多的问题，那么在网络时代，这些资源的无形性和不确定性更增加了知识产权保护的难度。
全文阅读，请点击此处。
The Anti-monopoly Risks of Asserting Standard Essential Patents in China
By Li Zhongsheng Lei Peng King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group
The nature and products of some industries, like wireless telecommunications, necessitate the incorporation of all essential patents related to the products into standards created by standardization setting organizations (“SSOs”). If they are to find buyers, manufacturers whether licensed or not must make products in accordance
标准必要专利权人提起侵权诉讼的反垄断风险简析
怎样维持健康的知识产权资产——知识产权审计和知识产权尽职调查的要点
无形资产是一个经营实体所拥有资产的重要组成部分，虽属非物质实体，但对其经营起着增加区别性、提高竞争优势的作用，其组成包括专利和创意设计，著作权和软件，商标，商号，商业外观, 荣誉，专有知识（包括专有技术、客户信息、人力资源等）以及特许资源和特享政策等，提供着盈利来源或保障。其性质也是一种专有权，其主要部分是可通过法律确认和保护的知识产权。
无形资产往往直接或间接地依附在有形资产上，同时具有催化增值功能（即本身不因被使用而产生直接损耗），但其交易便捷、易于复制流失、并依赖于隐形积累的特性，因此需要特别的管理措施加以保护。无形资产管理所涉及的资产要素有专利与工业设计、专有知识（包括商业秘密）、特许资源（包括许可）与特享政策、商标、商号、商业外观、版权、软件、域名等；也涉及资产权利的形成、取得、以及维护各阶段。
Continue Reading 怎样维持健康的知识产权资产——知识产权审计和知识产权尽职调查的要点
Enforcement: the last mile of intellectual property litigation
By Chen Changhui King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group
Civil enforcement is the last step of civil litigation (incl. intellectual property (IP) litigation), which plays a key role to realise civil rights. Whether or not it operates smoothly tends to be a weighted indicator to a nation’s legal development.
Enforcement constitutes the last yet crucial step of the protection of IP right holders’ interests. However, similar to other civil disputes, arduous enforcement has always perplexed IP right holders, which may cause that they cannot get the full extent of compensation (or even no compensation at all). Given that, how to avoid such a problem has become an intractable issue for both IP right holders and their attorneys.
Continue Reading Enforcement: the last mile of intellectual property litigation
Trademark comparing: disclaimed part no longer valid even with distinctiveness
By Yang Hua Ding Xianjie and He Tongjun King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group
What should we concern: when determining the level of similarity between trademarks, it should be limited to comparing the part that the citation mark has acquired the right to exclusive use with the mark in application. The part that is disclaimed of the exclusive right to use in an early registration even if has distinctiveness should not constitute a valid part for comparison and impede registration of a later filed trademark.
“Disclaiming the right to exclusive use” in trademark application refers to the situation in which the proprietor makes a disclaimer to give up any right to exclusive use for a part of the trademark, in order to avoid rejection of the whole application due to registrability issue of the disclaimed part. Signs prohibited from registration due to lack of distinctiveness are the part that is more commonly disclaimed of the right to exclusive use. In practice, some proprietors also disclaim the right to exclusive use for a part that has distinctiveness (the Disclaimed Part), which gives rise to the issue referred above, whether the Disclaimed Part will function to impede the registration by others of a later filed application.
Continue Reading Trademark comparing: disclaimed part no longer valid even with distinctiveness
Invention for hire in PRC: what should practitioners know – I
By Ou Xiuping Xu Jing Yin Ji King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group
The legal framework of service invention is stipulated by the PRC Patent Law and the Regulation on Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Also in April 2015, the State Council solicited public opinion of the Regulations on Service Invention (Draft), which has been amended for the fourth time[1]. This article will closely study and analyse hot-spot issues in PRC legal practice with respect to disputes over service invention on the case study, including:
Continue Reading Invention for hire in PRC: what should practitioners know – I
Trademark invalid: registering in others’ name with no authorisation
By Yang Hua Wang Fang King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group
What should we concern: registered trademark, filed in the name of others without others’ authorisation should be deemed as “obtained through means of fraud” and should be announced invalid.
DELTASOFA’S S.R.L. (“DELTASOFA”) was established on September 19, 1985 by Vincenzo Liborio Calia, a skilled master carpenter in Europe who in 1965 started to design and produce sofas in south Italy and created the famous sofa brand “caliaitalia”. Nowadays the “caliaitalia” sofa products are sold in countries in North America, the Middle East and the Far East.
On August 1 2008, a Guangdong company filed a trademark application for the mark “caliaitalia” under No. 6875537 (hereinafter as “mark in dispute”) in the name of “Calia Italia S.p.A” (the former name of DELTASOFA”). In 2011, this Guandong company, again in the name of “Calia Italia S.p.A.”, signed the trademark assignment documents regarding the mark in dispute and had the mark assigned to its affiliated company.
Continue Reading Trademark invalid: registering in others’ name with no authorisation