Intellectual Property

Subscribe to Intellectual Property via RSS

Kalley Chen, Dai Chen and Xu Zifeng  King & Wood Mallesons’ Security Group

Australia has had a range of general and sector-specific privacy laws for 20 years. At the Federal level, the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) initially regulated the way in which Commonwealth agencies dealt with the personal information of Australians. The scope of the Privacy Act was expanded to also cover the handling of individuals’ credit information and, more broadly in 2001, to cover all private sector organisations and the way in which they collect, use and disclose personal information. Individual States and Territories of Australia also have specific privacy laws that regulate the way State-based agencies deal with personal information, and laws relating to privacy are also found in a variety of legislative contexts.
Continue Reading Privacy Overhaul Imminent for Australia–A Reference to China

Xu Jing, Partner and Zhao Ye, Associate, IP Litigation

According to the fundamental principles of Chinese courts concerning software resale, the resalability of software under different sales models may also be different.

A. Traditional sales model

Under the traditional model, the supplier sells to their clients a CD-Rom or floppy disk containing the software and enters into an agreement with the clients on the scope of license.
Continue Reading Software Resale: A China IP Puzzle Part II

In recent years, second hand trading of software has experienced substantial growth and the legal issues involved in such transactions have also caught the eyes of the players in the industry. Generally, the legality of software resale is decided by whether the distribution rights of the copyright owners are exhausted upon the transaction. However, it is difficult to decide when a transaction should be regarded as "licensing" and when the transaction should be deemed as a "sale". As the number of software resale cases brought before the courts increases, the courts’ understanding of the nature of software trading develops. Various jurisdictions have formed their own approach on differentiating an act of sale from that of licensing.

Common copyrighted products such as books or CDs can be resold because most countries adapt the "doctrine of exhaustion of distribution rights" in their copyright law, namely once a copyright owner publicly distributes his/her original work or the copies of such work by way of "sale" or "gifting", the distribution right will be deemed exhausted and the owner may not reclaim such right.

Xu Jing, Partner and Zhao Ye, Associate, IP Litigation

Continue Reading Software Resale: A China IP Puzzle Part I

In recent years, search engine providers, P2P website or other Internet service providers are often challenged in the courts by content owners. While the legal actions brought by international record companies are constant headaches for major Chinese search engine providers, including Baidu, Yahoo and Sogou, international search engine giants like Google and YouTube have also been struggling to resolve various lawsuits internationally.

These cases raise the same issues for legislators and judges in all jurisdictions — how to evaluate the business models of Internet Service Providers or Online Service Providers ("ISPs" or "OSPs", collectively "ISPs") and the responsibilities and obligations for copyright protection of the ISPs?

In 2007, the US Ninth Circuit Court of the State of California rendered its judgment for Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill LLC. The California Court granted CCBill LLC immunity under the Safe Harbor Principle on the ground that the notice for removal sent by Perfect 10, Inc. failed to provide sufficient information and could not be deemed as effective notice. The intention of the US Congress when adopting the Safe Harbor Principle was to ensure that liabilities are shared fairly between the parties by requiring the copyright owner to bear the burden of proving the existence of infringement.  These safe harbor provisions are designed to shelter service providers from the infringing activities of their customers. The California Court’s decision has been interpreted by US legal professionals as another affirmation of the application of "Safe Harbor Principle" to ISPs.
 

He Wei, Partner and Wang Yaxi, Associate, Intellectual Property

Continue Reading Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill LLC — Insights on the Applications of the Safe Harbor Principle and how this is applied in China

There has been a great deal of media coverage in China in the past weeks regarding the impact of Microsoft’s making available its Windows Genuine Advantage (hereafter, “WGA”) to users with Chinese language versions of Windows operating systems. For users going to Microsoft for many of its software updates (excluding some security updates), a validation is required where WGA would notify the user if unlicensed Microsoft Windows software was found on the user’s computer. Microsoft contends that WGA has been made available to warn users of the presence of unlicensed software and to give them the opportunity to purchase licensed software which would then allow them to have the benefits associated with said software, such as product support and ongoing software updates.

Shi Yusheng, Partner, IP Litigation

Mr. Shi Yusheng has also discussed this issue recently on CCTV – 9’s Dialogue

Continue Reading Microsoft’s Windows Genuine Advantage Initiative and the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in China

Under the United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), “developed country Parties should provide new and additional financial resources to support the transfer of technology and take all practical steps to promote, facilitate and finance the transfer of, or access to, environmentally sound technologies and know how to developing country Parties.” However, a UNFCCC report revealed that a large portion of developing nations do not take advantage of CDM projects to import technology.
 

As long as technology transfer from developed countries is a convenient low-cost means for China to reduce GHG emissions, why doesn’t China have more CDM projects that involve technology transfer? [continue reading to see our analysis]
 

Wang Rui, Partner, International Trade

Continue Reading Clean Development Mechanism: Untapped Potential

At first glance, the goals of intellectual property law and competition law might appear to conflict. IPR owners are granted statutory rights to control access and charge monopoly rents to others for use of their rights. IPR owners may also use terms of IPR licences to regulate downstream activities of their distributors, such as imposing exclusivity, territorial restraints and price restraints. Competition law, on the other hand, is directed at curtailing such market power which may prove harmful to economic welfare.
Continue Reading Intersect Between Intellectual Property Law And Competition Law

Ting Xu, Associate, Trademark Department

On May 26, 2008, the China Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (“TRAB”) of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) made a decision in favor of Changyu Winery Group, upholding its exclusive use of the mark “cabernet” in Chinese （“解百纳”） as a registered trademark. The decision further found that Changyu established “解百纳”  as one of its trademarks through its use and did not consider “解百纳” the generic name for these cabernet grape varieties.  This means other wineries such as China Great Wall Winery, Dynasty Fine Wines Group Limited and Yantai Weilong Grape Wine Co. are prohibited from using the mark “解百纳”, which may certainly cause damage to these wine makers in marketing their products.
Continue Reading Wine Confusion: Trademark Dispute over Cabernet

Interviewed by Serwat Perwaiz, Editor of King & Wood’s Publication Group

As China’s economic and social presence on electronic forms of communication continues to develop and expand, the country’s regulatory bodies are stepping up to the challenge to keep pace with the new developments. We are lucky to have Dr. Martin Cave, Professor and Director of the Centre for Management under Regulation, Warwick Business School, to provide us his comments on the hot topics of Technology and the Internet.

When asked about his key areas of interest, he commented that he was particularly interested in “reform and liberalisation of the radio spectrum, which can support the amazing growth of voice and broadband wireless technologies we have seen in the past decade.” He went on to discuss how the standard model in Europe and the United States, which “relies on maximising competition and reducing regulation to the minimum, with a relatively small role for government policy and government subsidy” differs significantly from models in Asian countries where “government policy is a much stronger driver.”

Continue Reading Expert Look at Communications Technology: Comments by Dr. Martin Cave

There are Risks in Participating in the Formation of Standards.

On July 8, 2008, when China’s Supreme Court addressed the question raised by the Liao Ning High People’s Court arising from a patent infringement dispute, it stated, “If a patentee participates in the formulation of the Standard or agrees to incorporate its patented technology into the National Standard, the Industrial Standard and/or the Local Standard, it shall be deemed as the patentee authorizing other parties to exploit the patent for the purpose of conforming to the standards. The exploitation by the said parties may not constitute patent infringement as specified under Article 11 of the Patent Law.” 
 

How can this impact your patent in China? 

Xu Jing, Partner at King & Wood’s IP Litigation Practice

Continue Reading China Patent Holders Beware!