By Jiao Hongbin  King & Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group

On March 31, 2012, the National Copyright Administration of the PRC (NCAC) released the Draft Amendments to the Copyright Law of thePRC (the “Copyright Law”) (the “Draft Amendments”) and the Brief Explanations on the Draft Amendments (“Brief Explanations”)[i] for soliciting public opinions. Unlike the two previous revisions, the Draft Amendments proposed by China on its own initiative are home-grown. 

The prevailing Copyright Law was adopted by the 7th Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC) on September 7, 1990 and became effective on June 1, 1991. Two revisions in 2001 and 2010 were undertaken in light of China’s involvement with the World Trade Organization (WTO). The first revision was made for China’s entry into the WTO, where modifications and complements were made to coordinate the inconsistencies between the Copyright Law and the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS); two articles were revised in 2010 with an aim to enforce a WTO panel ruling on the dispute over intellectual property rights (“IPRs”) between China and the United States.

Continue Reading Key Disputable Issues regarding the Draft Amendments to China Copyright Law

作者：矫鸿彬  金杜律师事务所知识产权组

2012年3月31日，中华人民共和国国家版权局公开《中华人民共和国著作权法》（“《著作权法》”）（修改草案）文本和关于草案的简要说明[i]，向社会公开征求意见，此次修订被视为是中国对《著作权法》的首次主动修改。

现行的《著作权法》是1990年9月7日由第七届全国人大常委会审议通过并于1991年6月1日起施行，曾于2001年和2010年进行过两次修订，均与世界贸易组织有关。2001年进行的第一次修订是为了满足中国加入世界贸易组织的需要，对《著作权法》与世界贸易组织《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》不一致的地方进行了修改或补充；2010年进行的第二次修订是为了执行世界贸易组织关于中美知识产权争端案的裁决，对著作权法进行的只涉及两个条文的小修改。 

Continue Reading 《中华人民共和国著作权法》第三次修改草案的主要争议问题

By Huang Tao and Dai Yue  King & Wood Mallesons’ Dispute Resolution Group

Lacking knowledge of and exposure to China’s judicial and arbitrational system, foreign companies usually worry about dispute resolution clauses more than any other clause in a contract. Deciding which arbitration tribunal and what arbitration rules to specify becomes a sensitive and important aspect of contract negotiations for wholly foreign owned entities (“WFOE”) and cooperative joint ventures (“CJV”).

I．     Choice of Arbitration Tribunal

Contracts in which one party is a foreign entity will contain foreign elements, allowing the parties to choose their jurisdiction without restriction under PRC law. The parties to such a contract may decide at their discretion whether to choose an arbitration tribunal within China or in another country, or resort to ad hoc arbitration to resolve disputes.

Continue Reading Forum Shopping in China: CIETAC vs. UNCITRAL

作者：黄滔  戴月 金杜律师事务所争议解决组

由于对中国司法制度和仲裁制度的陌生或偏见，外国公司在订立合同时对争议解决条款的关注大大高于其它条款。而在争议解决条款中，它们最为关心的问题之一则是仲裁机构和仲裁规则的选择。在决定选择恰当的仲裁机构及仲裁规则前，外国公司应考虑下列法律问题。

一、仲裁机构的选择

在合同主体一方为外方的情况下，该合同由于具备了“涉外因素”，因而可以自由选择国内机构、国外机构或国外临时仲裁作为争议解决手段。中国法律对此均无禁止性规定。

Continue Reading 外资企业如何选择商事合同的仲裁机构和仲裁规则

作者：胡梅 刘海涛  金杜律师事务所争议解决组上海办公室

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。 Continue Reading 中国公司在美国上市的法律风险和成本考量

By Susan Ning,Liu Jia and Hazel Yin

On 3 May 2012,China’s Supreme People’s Court issued the Rules of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Hearing Civil Cases Caused by Monopolistic Conduct ("Rules").The Rules contain 16 articles covering standing of plaintiffs,jurisdiction,burden of proof,evidentiary rules,expert witness,the judicial process, form of civil liabilities and the statute of limitations.The Rules entered into force on 1 June 2012.

Compared to the draft Rules released last year for public comments ("Draft Rules")1,the Rules contain fewer articles and remain silent on a few issues that were previously addressed in the Draft Rules.This article discusses the major provisions in the Rules.

Continue Reading Supreme Court of China Issues Judicial Interpretation Governing Private Antitrust Litigations

作者：顾仁芳  金杜律师事务所争议解决组 香港办公室

本文分两部分刊登， 2012年6月5日金杜法律博客(Chinalawinsight)刊登的了本文的第一部分。文章第二部分将继续对《香港的法律制度及解决商业纠纷的民事诉讼程序》进行解读。

八、简易判决

简易判决可作为以全面审讯解决纠纷的另一选择。简易判决是在被告人没有提出抗辩的情况下，法庭可以不经过庭审即向原告人提供实体终局性判决结果[i]。简易判决的程序是为了避免被告人拖延判决进程，并在被告显然缺乏抗辩理由的情况下，避免浪费时间及诉讼成本。

Continue Reading 香港的法律制度及解决商业纠纷的民事诉讼程序（2）

作者：顾仁芳  金杜律师事务所争议解决组 香港办公室

一、简介

商界纠纷不可避免，找到既迅速又符合经济效益的争议解决方法至关重要。

香港作为亚洲最国际化的城市，是一个充满活力及东西方融合的大都会。香港给世界各地的企业家提供了一个公平竞争的平台，吸引了众多受过良好教育及技术精湛的工作人员；香港占据了无与伦比的地理位置——它是通往中国的门户；香港秉承法治理念，并以政府廉洁而被称道；香港推行低税率并投资兴建了世界一流的基础设施；香港保障信息自由流通及国际化的生活方式[i]。

Continue Reading 香港的法律制度及解决商业纠纷的民事诉讼程序（1）

By Zhang Yi, Alan Du and Hu Xia  King & Wood Mallesons’ Corporate Group Shanghai Office

Recently, it was reported by various media sources that the National Development Reform Commission (NDRC) had issued certain policies requiring an RMB fund (the ‘FIE GP Fund’) with a foreign invested enterprise (the ‘FIE’) acting as the general partner (the ‘FIE GP’) and domestic investors (exclusive of FIEs established in China) acting as limited partners to be regarded as a foreign investor. Being defined as a foreign investor means that the portfolio investments of such a FIE GP Fund shall be subject to foreign investment approvals, which are read by the public as referring to the approvals from the Ministry of Commerce or its local counterpart (MOFCOM).

International private equity firms often structure their RMB funds in the form of FIE GP Funds, as a result this news caused great concern among them because their RMB funds will be defined as offshore funds in regard to making portfolio investments and as a result there will probably be little chance of raising new RMB funds in the form of FIE GP Funds. Continue Reading NDRC reply on RMB Fund with FIE GP

By Renee Gu  King &  Wood Mallesons’ Dispute Resolution Group

This article continues to discuss The Legal System and Civil Procedure for Commercial Dispute Resolution in Hong Kong. The first part of this article was published on Chinalawinsight on May 2012.

VIII．Summary Judgment

As an alternative to resolving a dispute by way of a full trial, it may be an option to apply for a summary judgment. The purpose of the summary judgment is to give judgment before trial to a plaintiff, where the defendant has no defence to the claim[i]. Continue Reading The Legal System and Civil Procedure for Commercial Dispute Resolution in Hong Kong (Part II of II)