作者：罗华， 帝马修
2020年5月21日，美国参议会一致同意通过了《让外国公司负责法案》（“HFCAC法案”）。该法案如果变成法律，将会适用于在美国证券交易所上市的中概股，要求该类公司遵守美国法规及审计标准和信息共享，否则将面临退市的可能，尽管这样做可能会导致中概股违反中国法律。 Continue Reading 美国“让外国公司负责”法案与中概股退市
Chinese Update – U.S. Listed Chinese Companies and the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act
Written by Handel Lee, Laura Luo, Thomas M. Shoesmith
On May 21, 2020, the United States Senate passed the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (the “Bill”) with unanimous consent. If it becomes law, the Bill would apply to Chinese companies, among others, listed on U.S. securities exchanges and require them to comply with U.S. regulatory and audit standards and information sharing, notwithstanding that to do so may result in a breach of Chinese law. The consequence of non-compliance would be a prohibition on the trading of the company’s securities on any national securities exchange or through any over-the-counter method in the United States. Continue Reading Chinese Update – U.S. Listed Chinese Companies and the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act
股东和董事：基本程序会给你带来的麻烦
Sprout Land Holdings Ltd（申请破产管理令程序中），Re [2019] EWHC 806 (Ch)
作者：Barri Mendelsohn Jenny Wilcock, Cassandra Ditzel and Daniel Jones
2019年2月，英国高等法院就关于董事任命的书面决议无效后对后续管理人任命的影响做出了判决。 Continue Reading 股东和董事：基本程序会给你带来的麻烦
Shareholders and directors: where basic procedures can trip you up
Sprout Land Holdings Ltd (In Administration), Re [2019] EWHC 806 (Ch)
written by Barri Mendelsohn Jenny Wilcock, Cassandra Ditzel and Daniel Jones
In February 2019, the UK’s High Court was asked to consider the effects of an invalid appointment of a director, via written resolution, on the subsequent appointment of administrators. Continue Reading Shareholders and directors: where basic procedures can trip you up
买方在送达通知时应阅读细则
斯托巴特集团有限公司诉Stobart和Tinkler [2019] EWCA Civ 1376
英国上诉法院近日就有关股份购买协议项下单方通知的解释做出了判决。 Continue Reading 买方在送达通知时应阅读细则
Buyers read the fine print when serving notices
Stobart Group Ltd v Stobart & Tinkler [2019] EWCA Civ 1376
Written by Barri Mendelsohn
The construction of unilateral notices under share purchase agreements was recently considered by the UK’s Court of Appeal. Continue Reading Buyers read the fine print when serving notices
A new ground to defend bad faith trademark registration – CNIPA rules that new trademark application should reasonably yield to prior trademark right if the applicant has full awareness of other’s prior trademark
By Ding Xianjie King and Wood Mallesons’ IP group
Trademark squatting has been a common occurrence in China for many years, and even been a kind of “business” by trademark squatters, which has caused huge troubles to brand owners. It is not the case, as ordinary people might think, that all types of trademark squatting can be regulated by the explicit provisions of existing laws, otherwise the phenomenon would not be so difficult to eradicate. Continue Reading A new ground to defend bad faith trademark registration – CNIPA rules that new trademark application should reasonably yield to prior trademark right if the applicant has full awareness of other’s prior trademark
明知他人商标的存在，在申请新的商标时理应合理避让
作者：丁宪杰 金杜律师事务所知识产权部
长期以来，商标抢注现象在中国屡见不鲜，甚至曾经成为一门“生意”，给品牌拥有者带来无穷烦恼，因为并非如普通人所想像的那样，针对各类抢注行为都能利用现行法律的明确规定予以规制，否则商标抢注现象也就不会长期难以根治。中国商标法第十三条、第十五条、第三十二条都是品牌拥有人对抗抢注人的常用条款，但第十三条基于驰名商标认定、其适用条件高，第十五条第一款限于代表人或代理人抢注、适用情况有限，第十五条第二款和第三十二条又限定于商标必须在中国有在先使用并仅禁止他人在相同类似商品或服务上的注册；即便是放宽类似商品和服务认定的条件以适用第三十条、第三十一条，也是仅可禁止他人在放宽类似认定标准的商品或服务上的抢注，对打击商标抢注的效果有限。近来，随着打击商标抢注行为的力度之加强，商标法第四条和第四十四条第一款也开始为行政和司法机关频频适用，但在实际裁判中这几个条款往往更适用于那些不以使用为目的的大量囤积商标、以及扰乱商标注册秩序的行为。因此，精明的抢注人仍可从日趋严格的法律适用中发现可钻的漏洞，即在非类似商品上抢注他人少量在先使用甚或尚未使用的商标、且在数量上无法断定其目的是囤积，从而达到其坐待渔利等目的；同时，这些抢注者往往还都精通商标法律实践，利用法律的规定通过不断提交注册申请来保持其抢注的商标的有效性、不被他人依商标法第四十九条以连续三年不使用为由而撤销。而正当的品牌拥有人在扩展业务时，往往被这些抢注者的商标注册所阻碍，即便有证据证明抢注人明知商标属于品牌拥有人，但苦于这些抢注者之精明而无措。简言之，一个商标抢注人，如果在非类似商品上抢注他人的商标且并非大量抢注，在他人商标未能被证明为驰名商标的情形下，他人将很难阻止其注册。 Continue Reading 明知他人商标的存在，在申请新的商标时理应合理避让
First Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Case regarding Parallel Import Concluded by Guangzhou IP Court
By Jiao Hongbin, Liu Yuxin King and Wood Mallesons’ IP group
Recently, Guangzhou IP Court ruled on its first trademark infringement and unfair competition case regarding parallel import, in which it found such acts should neither constitute trademark infringement nor unfair competition. Continue Reading First Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Case regarding Parallel Import Concluded by Guangzhou IP Court
广州知识产权法院首例涉平行进口商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷尘埃落定
作者：矫鸿彬 刘宇欣 金杜律师事务所知识产权部
近日，广州知识产权法院在其审理的首例涉平行进口商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷案件中认定平行进口的行为不构成商标侵权及不正当竞争。
平行进口通常指”未经知识产权权利人的同意，将国外合法生产的产品进口到国内”的行为。中国司法实践中对该行为的合法性尚无相关明确规定。在该案中，广州市南沙区人民法院及广州知识产权法院均认为，在平行进口的产品系在国外合法生产的正品的情况下，平行进口行为并不构成商标侵权及不正当竞争。两审法院的观点概述如下： Continue Reading 广州知识产权法院首例涉平行进口商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷尘埃落定