The Reform of the Chinese Intellectual Property Trial System

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-90
Author(s):  
Haien Shen ◽  
Xiaohong Wen
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Property System ◽  
Chinese Intellectual ◽  
History Of ◽  
Recent Reform ◽  
The Law ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property ◽  
Reform And Opening Up

The 100-year history of China’s intellectual property system witnessed a shift from an “I have to use the law” to “the law serves me” approach, as well as the development of policies which shifted from transplanting the law to innovating the law. Since 1978, along with the Reform and Opening up, China has established an intellectual property legal system, which has experienced three stages—establishment, development and perfection. However, there are still many problems in the Chinese intellectual property protection regime. The most essential one is the implementation of the law. This makes the judicial system the focus of the reform debate. The recent reform of the judicial system for the intellectual property cases is a result of a series of systematic attempts over the years to structure a new judicial system for intellectual property cases. The most important outcome of these efforts is the ‘three-in-one’ trial model. At the end of 2014, intellectual property courts were established in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. These reforms unify the standards for the judgment, and conform to the international and professional trends in protecting intellectual property. However, due to multiple reasons, the judicial and administrative departments still have a long way to go in their joint efforts for the coordination and improvement of intellectual property protection.

Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights in Nigerian Courts

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 627-645
Author(s):  
Nkem Itanyi
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Comprehensive System ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Adequate Number ◽  
Property System ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property

Abstract There is no point in making comprehensive provisions for the protection of various intellectual property rights without also providing a corresponding comprehensive system for enforcing the same when the rights are or about to be infringed. Therefore, an accessible, sufficient and adequate system/procedure is paramount in any worthwhile intellectual property system. Right holders must be granted means to enforce their rights just as is obtainable in other forms of tangible and intangible properties. To this end, all intellectual property systems need an effective judicial system that is empowered to deal with both civil wrongs and criminal offences while being presided over by adequate number of judges with the requisite experience in intellectual property law. This paper therefore examines: the raison-d’être for protecting intellectual property rights; the various enforcement mechanisms via the courts; sanctions and remedies for infringement of intellectual property rights amongst other incidental matters. The paper concludes with a call for the review of the sanctions for infringing intellectual property rights.

scholarly journals In the service of secrecy: An enveloped history of priority, proof and patents

2021 ◽  
pp. 135918352110288
Author(s):  
Eva Hemmungs Wirtén
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
Property System ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Propriété Industrielle ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Double Envelope ◽  
Double Compartment

This article is about an everyday paper object: an envelope. However, as opposed to most other flat paper containers, the enveloppe Soleau can only be bought from L’Institut national de la propriété industrielle (INPI) in Paris. At the cost of €15 you get a perforated, double-compartment envelope allowing you to constitute proof of creation and assign a precise date to your idea or project. But the enveloppe Soleau is something much more than just a simple and cheap way by which you can prove priority in any creative domain. It is a material footprint anchored to centuries of practices associated with disclosure and secrecy, a gateway into the infrastructure of the intellectual property system and its complicated relationship to the forms of knowledge it purports to hold. The purpose of this article is to consider the making of the enveloppe Soleau as a bureaucratic document, a material device performing a particular kind of legal paperwork. In four different vignettes, the article tracks the material becoming of the enveloppe Soleau as an evidentiary receptacle, beginning by going back to early modern practices of secrecy and priority, continuing with its consolidation in two patents (from 1910 and 1911) to the inventor Eugène Soleau (1852–1929), and ending up, in 2016, dematerialized in the e-Soleau. As a bureaucratic document, the enveloppe Soleau shows just how much work a mundane paper object can perform, navigating a particular materiality (a patented double envelope); formalized processes of proof (where perforations have legal significance); the practices of double archiving (in an institution and with the individual) and strict temporal limitations (a decade). Ultimately, the enveloppe Soleau travels between the material and immaterial, between private and public, between secrecy and disclosure, but also between what we perceive of as the outside and inside of the intellectual property system.

Product Patent in Pharmaceuticals and Compulsory Licensing

2017 ◽  
pp. 108-123
Author(s):  
Jatinder Maan ◽  
Dinesh Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Compulsory License ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Political Pressure ◽  
Compulsory Licensing ◽  
Contentious Issue ◽  
History Of

The issue of patenting is a contentious issue. Different stakeholders hold opposite views. The pharmaceutical giants demand for stricter and longer Intellectual Property Protection for the promotion of research and development. They contend IP protection to be the “bedrock of their business”. While the health activists and governments of developing nations want greater flexibility in intellectual property protection and shorter patent period protection. Article 31 of the TRIPs agreement provides certain flexibilities to cater to certain situations. The countries are free to determine the grounds to issue provisions like compulsory licensing. But despite the provisions very few countries have used them. Pharmaceuticals giants with the backing of developed countries always try to denounce the practice of compulsory licensing with economic and political pressure. This chapter explains the concept and significance of Intellectual Property with reference to Pharmaceuticals. It also traces the little history of TRIPs agreement and explains the concept of Compulsory Licensing with trends in its use. It also discusses the few instances where compulsory License has been issued in different countries and tries to find the reasons of non issuance of Compulsory License.

Justifying Intellectual Property Protection

2011 ◽  
pp. 47-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Einar Himma
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Competing Interests ◽  
The Law

I argue that the law should provide limited protection of intellectual property interests. To this end, I argue that whether the law ought to coercively restrict liberty depends on an assessment of all competing interests. Further, I argue that the interests of content creators in controlling the disposition of the content they create outweigh the interests of other persons in using that content in most, but not all, cases. I conclude that, in these cases, morality protects the interests of content creators, but not the interests of other persons and hence would justify limited legal protection of the content creators’ interests.

scholarly journals SUSTAINING INNOVATIVE INFORMAL EDUCATION THROUGH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 79-101
Author(s):  
Ratnaria Wahid ◽  
Norafidah Ismail ◽  
Bakri Mat ◽  
Khaliza Saidin
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Religious Education ◽  
Informal Education ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Property System ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights Protection ◽  
Property Rights Protection ◽  
Creativity And Innovation

Various technological innovations in ICT have brought about profound changes in major aspects of education, namely the content delivery or pedagogy, and the structure or management of both formal and informal education. Current technology has also offered the ease of copying or reusing new innovation without the need to acknowledge or compensate the creators. New books, and methods or techniques can easily be copied and digital resources may speedily be scanned and forwarded without much regard to the creators’ effort or investment. These actions would potentially discourage creations of new innovations that would be useful for public lifelong learning. Understanding cultural perspectives in the relationship between the intellectual property system and religious works is significant since it analyzes the intersection of belief and culture with the application of the law. This paper explored the development of creativity and innovation in an informal education setting, specifically looking at Quranic teaching offered by private enterprises in Malaysia as a case study. This paper examined (a) to what extent the Quranic teaching and learning have been innovatively developed and (b) to what extent developers of new innovation in Quranic teaching and learning deem it necessary to protect their creations under intellectual property rights protection. This study utilized qualitative research, by way of document analysis gathered from reports, brochures, journal articles, newspapers, the Internet, websites and mass media focusing on the creativity and innovation in informal religious education. It also conducted semi-structured interviews with several companies that used new innovative methods in teaching the Quran. The findings revealed that although intellectual property protection is seen as a valuable business asset which provides legal recognition and acts as quality control, intellectual property protection plays a minimal role in encouraging innovation or the spread of Quranic teaching.

scholarly journals Learning to Litigate: the Relationship Between Past Litigation Experience and Litigation Outcomes in the Chinese Intellectual Property System

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina Vaarst Andersen ◽  
Karin Beukel ◽  
Beverly B. Tyler
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Rare Event ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Legal Process ◽  
Property System ◽  
Developing Markets ◽  
Chinese Intellectual ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractIntellectual property (IP) and the protection of IP is of increasing importance to firms’ competitiveness, and firms must be able to defend their IP when it is infringed upon. In most markets, IP and the defense of IP is a stringent legal process, but in developing markets and markets undergoing changes, this is not necessarily so. The Chinese IP system and protection is comparatively new, and the system is still under development. In this study, we analyze the relationship between firms’ previous litigation experience and litigation outcomes using a sample of 10,211 court cases tried in China between 2001 and 2009. We find that despite litigation being a rare event for most firms, plaintiffs’ prior litigation experience and especially prior successful litigation experience or experience with specific case types is related to their likelihood of a positive outcome. However, plaintiffs’ successful application of prior litigation experience is contingent on the type of litigation case.

scholarly journals The Intellectual Property Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement and Investment in Developing Nations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krista L. Cox
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Property System ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Partnership Agreement

The United States has some of the highest standards of intellectual property protection in the world, though many copyright and patent laws in the United States are limited through balancing provisions that provide exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by the intellectual property system. The United States has engaged in efforts to raise intellectual property standards worldwide through creation of new global norms, such as through negotiations of free trade agreements like the currently negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Higher levels of intellectual property protection may be unnecessary to attract investment in developing countries. In fact, increasing intellectual property standards may actually result in negative impacts on development for low- and middle-income countries. This paper examines the role of intellectual property rules in attracting investment for developing countries. It uses the proposals for the TPP's intellectual property chapter as an example on how higher levels of intellectual property enforcement may harm rather than promote investment.

scholarly journals Protecting Intellectual Property Rights and Traditional Ecological Knowledge: A Critical Look at Peru's Law 27811

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-79
Author(s):  
Michelle Hak Hepburn
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Traditional Ecological Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Ecological Knowledge ◽  
History Of ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property ◽  
San Martín

The Peruvian government's Law N. 27811, an intellectual property law passed in 2002 and designed to register and protect traditional knowledge, provides productive opportunities for critical analysis. Framed within the trajectory of international intellectual property rights and discussions that complicate the integration of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) into Cartesian scientific frameworks, this paper critically examines how the Peruvian law has been implemented and its impacts in Indigenous communities, particularly in the Andean Amazon region. The analysis is based on the author's work assisting Indigenous communities in San Martin register their knowledge through this law. While the law represents an advanced legal attempt to address power inequalities, it remains problematic. It does not address the impoverishment of Indigenous Peoples and continues to subordinate Indigenous TEK to Cartesian science. Although it is a symbolic recognition of the value of Peruvian Indigenous Peoples, other mechanisms are still required to redress the long history of colonization and racism.

19. Intellectual Property Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 535-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy Jones
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Trade Marks ◽  
Passing Off ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
The Law ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property ◽  
The Uk

This chapter considers the major intellectual property rights in the UK and the protection the law gives to these rights. It explains the meaning of copyright, patents, trade marks, and design rights, and considers the types of works that might be protected by them. It explains whether the rights need to be registered and if so the process of registration. It examines the time limits for the protection of the various rights and the remedies available for infringement of them. It also considers the protection the law gives to intellectual property via the tort of passing off. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the possibilities of protecting intellectual property rights outside the UK.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document