King and Wood

Subscribe to King and Wood's Posts
Contact:Read more about King and Wood

By Susan Ning, Sun Yiming, Liu Jia and Yin Ranran

On 2 December 2011, China Telecom and China Unicom announced that they have applied to the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) for suspension of its antitrust investigation into their internet access pricing practices, by promising to adjust the internet access prices and overhaul their broadband services.

According to their announcements 1, China Telecom and China Unicom stated that they have proactively cooperated with the NDRC’s investigation and have engaged in "self-evaluation" of the challenged pricing practices.  Both companies acknowledged "room for improvement" for their interconnection services and pricing practices.Continue Reading China Telecom and China Unicom Seek to Settle Antitrust Probe

作者：金杜律师事务所外商投资组

对于讨论日久的PE监管问题，中国发改委在日前给出了说法，发改委于12月8日发布《关于促进股权投资企业规范发展的通知》（“《通知》”）。《通知》是我国首个全国性股权投资企业管理规则，规定股权投资企业的资本只能以私募方式募集。《通知》规范了股权投资企业的设立、资本募集与投资领域，要求股权投资企业遵照《公司法》和《合伙企业法》有关规定设立。资本只能以私募方式，向特定的具有风险识别能力和风险承受能力的合格投资者募集，资本募集人须向投资者充分揭示投资风险，不得承诺固定回报。股权投资企业的所有投资者只能以合法的自有货币资金认缴出资。资本缴付可以采取承诺制，即投资者在股权投资企业资本募集阶段签署认缴承诺书，在股权投资企业投资运作实施阶段，根据股权投资企业的公司章程或者合伙协议的约定分期缴付出资。Continue Reading 发改委：股权投资企业资本只能以私募方式募集

By Susan Ning, Sun Yiming and Liu Jia

On December 7, the Provisional Measures on Investigating and Penalizing Violation of Notification Obligations for Concentrations between Business Operators (Provisional Measures) were reviewed and discussed at the No. 57th Ministerial Affairs Meeting of the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) and were passed in principle.1  

It was discussed at the meeting that currently companies frequently ignore their merger control notification obligations under the Anti-Monopoly Law which has caused negative social impact.  Under such circumstances, the Provisional Measures are expected to strengthen MOFCOM’s enforcement in relation to investigation and punishment for those companies who fail to honor their notification obligations.Continue Reading MOFCOM Passed Provisional Rule on Failure to Notify on Concentration

作者：胡梅 刘海涛 北京金杜律师事务所争议解决组

近几个月来，为数不少的中国企业被指控违反美国证券法和上市公司准则，并因此受到了相关调查和法院诉讼。这些问题的曝光通常源于公司聘请的会计师事务所对公司财务信息真实性的怀疑，或是出于外界对公司某些不正当交易的指责。这些公司在被内部审计委员会、美国证监会和相关证交所调查的同时，也面临受害股东提起的法律诉讼。大多数这类中国公司根本没有预想到会面临这些诉讼和调查，也没有料想到其强度和因此会产生的高额费用。这一切都对公司及其董事、管理人员和员工形成了巨大的压力。公司为配合调查或应诉需要调集大量的人力和资金，相关的开支动辄上千万美元，同时还不可避免地殃及公司的日常运作和员工的士气。

为了合规以及应对在美诉讼都要付出高昂的资金成本，外加股价的低迷和交易量的骤减，对于中国企业来说，美国资本市场的吸引力已不如往日。这些因素正促使一些中国公司重新考虑是否要继续保留其美国上市公司的资格。这类公司有多种退出机制可供选择。公司可以先退市，再通过私募收购实现私有化。公司也可选择退市后作场外交易，或者作为粉单上市公司。退市的成本一般会很高昂，因此在决定退市前公司需要先作慎重周密的考虑。

Continue Reading 中国公司在美国上市的法律风险和成本方面的考量

King & Wood’s Trademark Group

After a three-year trial, the case of Kirin Kyowa Foods Co., Ltd. vs. Chen and Wang over a trademark assignment contract has currently been decided by the first instance. Kirin Kyowa Foods Co., Ltd. (the "Plaintiff"), as the proprietor of the trademark "可得然", appointed Shanghai Aucane Enterprise Co., Ltd. ("Aucane") as its sales agent for gelatine bearing the "可得然" trademark. In March 2006, Chen (the "Defendant"), the legal representative of Aucane, preemptively filed an application for registration of "CURDLAN", which is the English equivalent of the "可得然" trademark at the China Trademark Office (the "TMO"). In 2007, both parties signed a Trademark Assignment Contract (the "Contract"), requiring the Defendant to assign the trademark "CURDLAN" to the Plaintiff at the price of US$2,000. In May 2008, the TMO took office action on the grounds that "the assignor’s signature is evidently inconsistent with the one filed with the TMO in the past", and required the Plaintiff to provide a copy of the assignor’s ID card and its notarized statement of agreement on the said trademark assignment. However, the Defendant failed to provide any of the above materials, causing the TMO to refuse the assignment of "CURDLAN", and thus the Plaintiff appealed to the court.

Continue Reading Trademark Assignment Dispute Over “CURDLAN” — Kirin Kyowa Foods Co., Ltd. vs. Chen and Wang

King & Wood’s Trademark Group

On November 9, 2011, the China Trademark Office (the "TMO") has partially adjusted its official website for the purpose of facilitating the public in browsing and searching information about recordal of pledges of exclusive rights to registered trademarks. The adjustments are in respect of the place of the information, the means of disclosure and the items of disclosure.

Thanks to such adjustments, the public may directly search whether the exclusive right of a registered trademark is pledged in the column "Use of Trademark Rights" on the TMO website, including name of the pledgor, name of the pledgee, the registration number of the pledged trademark, and validity period of the pledge. Moreover, the pledge information in e-charts has changed to web links below which the public may find a collection of information of pledges as of November 2009.Continue Reading China Trademark Office Adjusts Means of Disclosure for Pledge of Exclusive Rights

金杜律师事务所商标组

2011年11月9日，商标局对“中国商标网”商标专用权质权登记信息公示页面进行部分调整，以方便公众进行网页浏览及查询。具体涉及信息公示的位置、方式和内容等方面的调整。

本次调整后，公众如需了解某个商标是否存在质押登记，可直接在“中国商标网”的“商标权运用”一栏中查询相关信息，包括“出质人名称”、“质权人名称”、“出质商标注册号”、“质权登记期限”等。另外，质权登记信息由表格页面调整为链接页面，并将2009年11月至今的登记信息在该链接下汇总。Continue Reading 国家工商总局商标局调整商标专用权质权登记信息公示方式

作者：楼仙英 姚迪 金杜律师事务所知识产权组

新修订的《中华人民共和国专利法》（1）（“专利法”）和《中华人民共和国专利法实施细则》（2）（“实施细则”）中对职务发明中发明人奖励与报酬进行了修改，在鼓励技术创新实现产业化的大背景下，这种改进充分发挥了制度在鼓励科技开发与技术创新以促进社会生产力发展方面的积极作用，但同时，特别是在日本蓝光案以7千万人民币和解结案的情况下，它也无疑给用人单位在技术创新方面的奖励和报酬管理制度上带来了一定的影响与挑战。

例如，根据《实施细则》第七十六条的规定，被授予专利权的单位可以与发明人约定或者在其依法制定的规章制度中规定奖励、报酬的方式和数额。因此，很多公司便纷纷在劳动合同中约定或在公司规章制度中规定，“双方确认并同意雇员的奖励和报酬包括在工资中”或“双方确定并同意雇员不要求任何奖励和报酬”等。其认为，只要合同基于双方意思自治，就不会存在风险。但在对各国职务发明制度进行比较研究后，我们认为这样的安排有很大风险，现分析如下：

为方便讨论上述问题，先简化问题如下：若雇主基于雇员的职务发明获得的巨大商业利润与雇员所获得的奖励与报酬完全不符时，雇员是否有权请求法院或仲裁机构变更或撤销合同，并请求额外的奖励和报酬？Continue Reading 防止职工职务发明诉讼

By Cecilia Lou and Steven Yao King & Wood’s Intellectual Property Group

The Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China(1)("Patent Law") and Regulations for the Implementation of the Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China(2) ("Implementing Regulations") has drawn our attention to rewards and remuneration for inventors. The Patent Law stipulates that employers must pay reasonable rewards and remuneration to inventors of a service invention and the Implementing Regulations explicitly address the amount payable. For purposes of encouraging technological innovation and industrialization, the change is sure to play a positive role in motivating employee initiatives and promoting social productivity. However, it will also bring certain challenges to many employers in terms of compliance with reward and remuneration issues in China, especially when the Blue LED case in Japan resulted in a 70 million RMB settlement.

The key issue of concern to employers is: Whether the huge commercial benefits acquired by the employer based on a service invention made by its employee do not correspond to the remuneration received from the employer due to the creation of the service invention agreed in the remuneration clause in China, whether the employee shall be entitled to request the court to modify or even revoke the remuneration clause and request some additional remuneration?Continue Reading Dodging Service Invention Disputes

By Yan Jun and Chen Haiting King & Wood’s Real Estate Group

With urbanization surging in China, conflicts triggered by urban housing demolition constitute a grave threat to social stability. In order to cope with the legislative demands posed by new situations, China’s State Council ("CSC") made amendments to the Administrative Regulations on Urban Housing Demolition and Relocation(1)("2001 Regulations") and promulgated the Regulations on Expropriation and Compensation of Housing on State-owned Land on January 21, 2011 ("New Regulations").

Compared to the 2001 Regulations, the New Regulations set forth some principles in housing expropriation. The New Regulations stipulate that compensation standards should be set no lower than market prices, and require increased transparency during the expropriation process. The New Regulations specify circumstances under which compulsory expropriation can be conducted for the sake of the public interest. Though there are still some debatable points to be clarified, the New Regulations have made significant improvements in the regulation of public rights and the protection of private rights. The promulgation of the New Regulations caters to the economic and social development of China, which fully reflects China’s legislative progress in building a more democratic society. This article will explore the major changes and highlights of the New Regulations.Continue Reading Understanding the Regulations on Expropriation and Compensation of Housing on State-owned Land