Browse by title

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 85,292 items

This content is available to you

Peter K Yu

Abstract

This article explores what it means for the Chinese intellectual property system to hit 35. It begins by briefly recapturing the system's three phases of development. It discusses the system's evolution from its birth all the way to the present. The article then explores three different meanings of a middle-aged Chinese intellectual property system – one for intellectual property reform, one for China, and one for the TRIPS Agreement and the global intellectual property community.

You do not have access to this content

Peter K Yu

Abstract

This article explores what it means for the Chinese intellectual property system to hit 35. It begins by briefly recapturing the system's three phases of development. It discusses the system's evolution from its birth all the way to the present. The article then explores three different meanings of a middle-aged Chinese intellectual property system – one for intellectual property reform, one for China, and one for the TRIPS Agreement and the global intellectual property community.

You do not have access to this content

Li Mingde

Abstract

In China, to enact or amend an intellectual property law, such as the Copyright Law, the Patent Law, the Trademark Law or the Unfair Competition Law is a complicated process, involving a number of competent administrations, the State Council, and the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Generally speaking, there are three steps to enacting or amending an intellectual property law. First, a competent administration, such as the National Copyright Administration (in charge of the Copyright Law), the State Intellectual Property Office (in charge of the Patent Law), or the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (in charge of the Trademark Law and the Unfair Competition Law), shall draft a law or amendment on the basis of their views. Secondly, the State Council shall develop its law or amendment on the basis of the drafting submitted by a competent agency and the suggestions or opinions of other administrative agencies. Thirdly, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress shall review the drafted law or amendment by the State Council three times, making some necessary changes on the basis of its views, and then pass the law or amendment. Although the consensuses will be gathered by these three steps, it is time-consuming to pass or amend a law, taking about eight to ten years.

You do not have access to this content

Li Mingde

Abstract

In China, to enact or amend an intellectual property law, such as the Copyright Law, the Patent Law, the Trademark Law or the Unfair Competition Law is a complicated process, involving a number of competent administrations, the State Council, and the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Generally speaking, there are three steps to enacting or amending an intellectual property law. First, a competent administration, such as the National Copyright Administration (in charge of the Copyright Law), the State Intellectual Property Office (in charge of the Patent Law), or the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (in charge of the Trademark Law and the Unfair Competition Law), shall draft a law or amendment on the basis of their views. Secondly, the State Council shall develop its law or amendment on the basis of the drafting submitted by a competent agency and the suggestions or opinions of other administrative agencies. Thirdly, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress shall review the drafted law or amendment by the State Council three times, making some necessary changes on the basis of its views, and then pass the law or amendment. Although the consensuses will be gathered by these three steps, it is time-consuming to pass or amend a law, taking about eight to ten years.

You do not have access to this content

Ken Shao

Abstract

China is widely regarded as a norm taker of the global intellectual property regime dominated by industrialized nations. It is however likely that China will become a norm holder due to China's increasing strengths in high technology and innovation as well as its expanding outbound investment into foreign high-tech sectors. Globalization and the global intellectual property regime that serves it are defined by neoliberal capitalism. Chinese enterprises equipped with improved market experience will soon find these neoliberal, corporate interest-maximizing game rules very attractive. As a consequence, they may become a new norm holder of the current intellectual property regime, and perhaps a more predatory one.

You do not have access to this content

Ken Shao

Abstract

China is widely regarded as a norm taker of the global intellectual property regime dominated by industrialized nations. It is however likely that China will become a norm holder due to China's increasing strengths in high technology and innovation as well as its expanding outbound investment into foreign high-tech sectors. Globalization and the global intellectual property regime that serves it are defined by neoliberal capitalism. Chinese enterprises equipped with improved market experience will soon find these neoliberal, corporate interest-maximizing game rules very attractive. As a consequence, they may become a new norm holder of the current intellectual property regime, and perhaps a more predatory one.

You do not have access to this content

Dong Huijuan and Lin Xiuqin

Abstract

The Chinese Trademark Law, revised for the third time in 2013, was devised to achieve new goals and to move towards the stronger protection of right-holders. There are some changes or trends in the legislative and judicial practice worthy of attention, for instance placing greater emphasis on trademark use (including factual use), different interpretations of such use, changes in the recognition and protection of ‘well-known trademarks’, the ‘prior use’ defence, and so on. These alterations might cause new debates or discussion on some essential problems in trademark law. On the whole, Chinese Trademark Law has been amended towards ‘internationalization’ and market orientation.

You do not have access to this content

Dong Huijuan and Lin Xiuqin

Abstract

The Chinese Trademark Law, revised for the third time in 2013, was devised to achieve new goals and to move towards the stronger protection of right-holders. There are some changes or trends in the legislative and judicial practice worthy of attention, for instance placing greater emphasis on trademark use (including factual use), different interpretations of such use, changes in the recognition and protection of ‘well-known trademarks’, the ‘prior use’ defence, and so on. These alterations might cause new debates or discussion on some essential problems in trademark law. On the whole, Chinese Trademark Law has been amended towards ‘internationalization’ and market orientation.

You do not have access to this content

Zhang Liguo and Nari Lee

Abstract

This article examines the establishment of specialized intellectual property (IP) courts in China in 2014. It explores these courts in the context of the IP strategy driven by the national administration, with the aim of highlighting their Chinese characteristics. The article notes that the motivation for establishing these courts was to improve judicial protection of IP rights, a goal aligning with the major target set in the National Intellectual Property Strategy. The establishment of these IP courts was pushed forward by the highest authority to overcome procedural and political obstacles. It was conceived as a pilot scheme for carrying out judicial reform. As such, it is expected that the new measures adopted in these IP courts could later be extended to all other courts in China. One real and compelling reason for establishing specialized IP courts is the rapidly growing volume of IP disputes, which demands coherent and efficient rulings from courts with technologically competent judges. Although this move has yet to provide forum concentration at the appellate level, the specialized IP courts in China have integrated judicial resources and harmonized the interpretation of IP law. In the interim, they have given a clear signal that IP rights are private rights to be adjudicated by courts and implied that IP governance in China has become more market-oriented.

You do not have access to this content

Zhang Liguo and Nari Lee

Abstract

This article examines the establishment of specialized intellectual property (IP) courts in China in 2014. It explores these courts in the context of the IP strategy driven by the national administration, with the aim of highlighting their Chinese characteristics. The article notes that the motivation for establishing these courts was to improve judicial protection of IP rights, a goal aligning with the major target set in the National Intellectual Property Strategy. The establishment of these IP courts was pushed forward by the highest authority to overcome procedural and political obstacles. It was conceived as a pilot scheme for carrying out judicial reform. As such, it is expected that the new measures adopted in these IP courts could later be extended to all other courts in China. One real and compelling reason for establishing specialized IP courts is the rapidly growing volume of IP disputes, which demands coherent and efficient rulings from courts with technologically competent judges. Although this move has yet to provide forum concentration at the appellate level, the specialized IP courts in China have integrated judicial resources and harmonized the interpretation of IP law. In the interim, they have given a clear signal that IP rights are private rights to be adjudicated by courts and implied that IP governance in China has become more market-oriented.