Intellectual Property

Subscribe to Intellectual Property via RSS

In patent prosecution, an examiner often mentions the term "common knowledge" when evaluating a step forward in an invention, as one cannot patent common knowledge. Common knowledge in the IP sense is generally a fact known or ought to be known to one skilled in the art and can be applied by such a person to solve specific technical problems. Common knowledge can also be a technical means that is most likely to be considered and applied by one skilled in the relevant technical field when working on solutions to specific technical problems. As China’s Guidelines for Patent Examination (the "Guidelines") do not provide a clear definition for "common knowledge", the examiner and the applicant or the applicant’s attorney often disagree on what is common knowledge in a particular patent dispute.

By Chen Wei, Partner at King & Wood’s Intellectual Property GroupContinue Reading Common Knowledge in Patent Prosecution

By Xu Jing, Partner at King & Wood’s Intellectual Property Group

Malicious litigation is broadly thought to be using a legal right to litigate to protect an interest when no substantive right has been violated. Currently, Chinese law does not provide any specific provisions on how to determine whether a party has abused its right to litigate, nor does the law define the concept of malicious litigation. Moreover, Chinese law does not provide specific remedies for a victim of malicious litigation to repair the damages suffered from a malicious litigation.Continue Reading Counter-Suit for Damages Actions in Malicious Litigation

China’s rapid economic development and its emerging middle class allow franchises to operate in China under the following model:

The franchisor
• owns a well-known brand with a global reputation;
• has a strong desire to expand its brand in China;
• currently lacks sufficient capital and the traditional franchising model is no longer suitable to support such expansion.

The franchisee:
• has a well-developed distribution network;
• already owns second-line brands for the same or similar products which have already established certain market share in China;
• has ready capital and other operational resources.

By Cecilia Lou, Partner at King & Wood’s Intellectual Property Group

Continue Reading Franchising Challenges in China Part II

Once a friend of mine visited Shanghai and asked me to recommend some quick restaurants. After listing a few options, I realized that he was not interested in them as he just wanted to find a simple restaurant providing real Shanghai cuisine. It dawned on me that, we were surrounded by national and international franchised stores with standardized products and services which often provide little local flavor. Franchising is ubiquitous in China, and not just the fast food chains.

 By Cecilia Lou, Partner at King & Wood’s Intellectual Property Group

Continue Reading Franchising Challenges in China

Traditionally civil, administrative and criminal IPR cases have been heard by the Intellectual Property, Administrative and Criminal Divisions of the courts, respectively. For instance, both the IPR Tribunals and the Administrative Tribunals of the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People’s courts were entitled to exercise jurisdiction over IPR administrative cases involving patent and trademark rights grants and determinations. The issue is that different divisions may apply different criteria to the same case.

Xu Jing & Zhang Hairuo, IP Litigation, King & Wood

Continue Reading Unification of Jurisdiction in IPR-Related Civil, Criminal and Administrative Cases in China

The Supreme People’s Court promulgated the “Interpretation on the Application of the Law Concerning Several Issues Regarding the Trials of Civil Disputes Relating to the Protection of Famous Trademarks” on April 23, 2009. This Interpretation clarifies what constitutes “famous” trademarks in China.

Xu Jing, Partner, IP Litigation

 Continue Reading Rise of “Famous” trademarks in China

On April 21, 2009, China’s Supreme People’s Court promulgated its “Opinion on Several Issues Concerning Trials of IP Cases to Serve the Public Interest under the Current Economic Environment” In this Opinion, the Supreme People’s Court first clarifies that injunctive relief should not necessarily be granted in all intellectual property infringement cases. Under certain circumstances, the Court stated that an award of reasonable or sufficient damages can be an effective substitute for claims of injunctive relief.

Xu Jing, Partner, Intellectual Property

Continue Reading Injunctive Relief Alternatives in IP Related Cases in China

Wang Rui, Partner, International Trade

The Chinese legislature created a hybrid from the different approaches adopted by civil and common law jurisdictions through the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China (the “Copyright Law”) and the Regulations on the Implementation of the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China (the“Implementation Regulations”), and produced the twin concepts of “legal entity work” and “occupational work” for assigning rights to works made in the course of an employment relationship. For example, a book written by a group of employees organized by an entertainment company for celebrating the company’s anniversary would likely be considered “legal entity work”, but a piece of music composed by a composer employee (not for specific purposes) is “occupational work”, because in the former case, supervision of the company would be involved but the latter case it would not.
Continue Reading Copyright Due Diligence Investigations in China: Legal Entity Work or Occupational Work?

Mia Qu, Bessie Ye, Nick Wang of King & Wood’s Intellectual Property Group

As 2009 begins and the economic crisis has hit most major markets globally, the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (“Supreme Court”) is studying how to adjust judicial policy on intellectual property rights (“IPRs”). The new policies will outline developing trends in the legal protection of IPR in China that may occur this year:
Continue Reading 2009: New Trends in China’s Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights