By Kenneth Choy, Partner, King & Wood – Hong Kong
At times, an international company may find that their application for registration of a trademark is rejected by the Chinese Trademark Office. When this happens and all administrative appeals are exhausted, are there alternative means of brand protection available in China?Continue Reading Copyright Protection for your Brand when Trademark Protection is Unavailable
By Li Ruihai and Su Juan, King & Wood’s IP Department
Patent ownership disputes arise, when a party challenges the ownership of a patent right at the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) and files suit with the People’s Court to seek rectification of the ownership of the patent. Article 135 of the General Principles of Civil Law of the PRC (Civil Law) provides that "unless otherwise stipulated by law, the statute of limitations to file civil actions with the People’s Court shall be 2 years." The PRC Patent Law (Patent Law) provides no specific provision regarding the statute of limitations in patent ownership disputes. Hence, issue arises as to whether the court can, upon the defendant’s request, dismiss the plaintiff’s claim for patent ownership due to the statute of limitations for civil actions.
Continue Reading Limitation of Actions Regarding Patent Ownership Disputes
By Mia Qu and Bessie Ye, King & Wood’s IP Department
To many foreign companies, China remains attractive as the world’s largest potential market for pharmaceutical products. As such products rely heavily on the protection of intellectual property rights, it is essential for foreign companies in this field to adopt a combination of IP protection methods to formulate a strategy for their products in China. To this end, China has established a relatively comprehensive legal system in relation to IPR protection where intellectual assets are protected by way of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets.
Continue Reading Protecting Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property Rights in China
By Jiang Ling, Partner, King & Wood’s Trademark Department
The term "works" used and protected under the Copyright Law refers to original intellectual creations in the literary, artistic and the scientific domain, in so far as they are capable of being reproduced in a certain tangible form. As for literal works, this refers to the works manifested in text form, no matter how long it is or what type or format of literature it uses. As long as it is original, it should be within the scope of protection by the PRC Copyright Law (as well as Trademarks as previously discussed). Therefore, it can be concluded that an advertising slogan is in principle not excluded from copyright protection on the condition that it is original. However, the Copyright Law does not define what "original" is. Judging by judicial practice, the expression of original works may not necessarily be unprecedented, and re-creation based on previous intellectual works of others is not forbidden either. In general, works possess originality as long as it is created by the author independently rather than plagiarizing others’ works which bears some personalized characteristics. Thus, it is possible for slogans to be copyrighted.
Continue Reading Just Do It!? Protecting Advertising Slogans in China Part II
By Kenneth Choy, Partner, Corporate, King & Wood–Hong Kong
Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary, the Hon. John C Tsang, gave his annual budget speech Wednesday, February 24th. Buried in the 178 paragraph speech on the 2010-2011 Budget Report were two paragraphs relating to intellectual property rights. The issues mentioned by the Financial Secretary may benefit inventors and high-tech start ups.
Continue Reading Hong Kong Budget Report: New Benefits for Inventors
By Kenneth Choy, Partner, Corporate, King & Wood–Hong Kong
The World Intellectual Property Organization, also known as WIPO, recently disclosed the number of international patent applications filed under its Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT”) for 2009. A copy of the release, entitled International Patent Filings Dip in 2009 Downturn (PR/2010/6), may be downloaded here. While the total number of PCT applications filed for the year was down compared to 2008, filings by applicants from East Asian countries actually grew with Japan, Korea and China ranking among the top five filing countries. Although the number of applications from the United States dropped by more than 11% to 45,700 applications, it still held its place on top of the rankings. Japan (2), Korea (4) and China (5) accounted for 45,839 PCT applications in 2009, about 30% of total filingsContinue Reading 30% Jump in Chinese WIPO Filings
By Jiang Ling, Partner, King & Wood’s Trademark Department
Concise and vivid advertising slogans quickly draw the public’s attention and are integral to a company’s brand. Over years of use and promotion, some slogans have become well-known to the public, such as Nike’s "Just do it", Adidas’ "Impossible is nothing" and DeBeers’ "Diamonds are forever." In many ways, such slogans are often no less important than the company’s logo and other marks. As such, companies must figure how to protect and prevent the unlicensed use of their advertising slogans. Accomplishing this in China presents a unique set of considerations.
Continue Reading Just Do It!? Protecting Advertising Slogans in China Part I
By Kenneth Choy, Partner, Corporate, King & Wood – Hong Kong
“Chow Sang Sang” (周生生) is a successful and well recognized name in the jewelry business. The name in Chinese has an auspicious meaning of “continuous growth” or “endless vitality of the Chow family”. Continue Reading Family Feud in Hong Kong: Chow Sang Sang Trademark Dispute
King & Wood’s IP Legal Group in Beijing
The Domain Name Dispute Settlement Center of CIETAC was established in December, 2000, and began operation on July, 2005, as the Internet Disputes Settlement Center. This Center accepts cases including cybersquatting of domain names (disputes on Chinese domain names, e.g. ".cn", and top-level general domain name, e.g.".com"), cybersquatting of general websites, wireless websites, text message websites, etc.
Last month, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the closely followed case of Bilski v. Kappos, 08-964. The case concerns a patent application for hedging risk in commodities trading. Both the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected the claims.
…
Continue Reading Bilski v. Kappos, the end of the ‘Machine or Transformation Test’?