Intellectual Property in China 知识产权与中国发展

Speech at ICBPS II

2008-12-09T11:27:00.007+08:00

Yesterday, I gave a presentation in English titled Draft Third Patent Law Amendment: Background, Major Changes, and Implications for China's Biopharmaceutical Industry at the Second International China Biopharmaceutical Symposium (ICBPS II).

实施知识产权战略推动自主创新

2008-10-08T16:56:00.009+08:00

登载于《中国发展观察》（国务院发展研究中心主办）2008年第10期（总第046期）。

转载：（1），（2），（3）。

《中国企业知识产权海外维权手册》出版了

2008-06-24T17:15:00.005+08:00

参与了《中国企业知识产权海外维权手册》一书的编写工作。

不过，最终版本采用我的文稿不是很多。

不管怎样，参与编写的过程（1）、（2）、（3）令人愉快。

Scholarly Publication and Copyright from MIT

2007-10-23T14:16:00.000+08:00

Retaining Copyrights to Increase Research Impact: Online Tutorial

Scholarly Publication - MIT Libraries

The tutorial is "intended to explain how copyright relates to publication agreements for research articles, and how authors can increase the impact of their work by negotiating to retain rights to post their articles on the web or reuse them in other ways".

I have the awful experience that scholarly articles cannot be accessed without subscription or membership privilege when I just wanna check or cite the original.

Digital technology makes open access easy, and a balanced relationship among authors, publishers, and the general public is not impossible.

Myths and Realities of IPR Protection in China

2007-09-27T16:41:00.000+08:00

From World Economic Forum Inaugural Annual Meeting of the New Champions 2007

Proposed Fund to Help IP Litigation

2007-09-26T13:49:00.000+08:00

By Jia Hepeng for Intellectual Property Watch

China Proposes Fund To Help Its Firms Fight IP Litigation

BEIJING - China is proposing a fund to help its enterprises cope with rising international litigation related to intellectual property rights (IPRs).

The message, together with other measures, was delivered by Zhang Qin, deputy director of the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) at a national corporate IPR meeting on 2 September, but it was not made public until 10 September.

Sun Pingping, a spokeswoman of SIPO, confirmed the news, saying the scale and detailed operation of the fund have not been finalised.

Zhang told the corporate meeting that international legal cases on IP that Chinese enterprises face have been growing. While some of the lawsuits arise from Chinese enterprises' poor IPR awareness and ownership, it is possible that some multinationals are abusing IPR to block the rise of Chinese firms, he said.

Together with the fund, SIPO will help some enterprises streamline their IPR strategies, organise patent examiners to provide patent searches and establish early warning services to prevent the potential patent infringements by Chinese companies.

The policies came amidst more multinationals suing Chinese exports for allegedly having copied their patented products.

German auto giant BMW, for example, claims a sedan of the Chinese firm Shuanghuan Auto copies its X5 and is suing the German company that imported the car.

Three years before, thousands of Chinese DVD players were confiscated by a German customs after they were accused by an alliance of electronics giants such as Matsushita, Toshiba and JVC to have used their patented technologies without authorisation. The DVD patent dispute ended with Chinese manufacturers agreeing to pay royalty fees up to US$8 for per DVD player, whose price has been lowered to US$40 as a result of severe market competition.

According to SIPO, by the end of 2006, the US International Trade Commission (USITC) had instituted 58 Section 337 investigations - a major US measure against infringement of IPR - against Chinese enterprises. In 2006 alone, there were 13 such cases, accounting for 39.3 percent of the total number of the Section 337 investigations USITC launched.

"Although many Chinese companies lack patents for their products, the patent barriers for their exports are not insurmountable," Sun told Intellectual Property Watch. She added that if Chinese companies are active in addressing the patent disputes they are entangled in, they might find some relevant patents are outdated while others could be overcome by slight revisions. "The fund could promote more Chinese companies to reasonably face international IPR charges," Sun said.

However, it seems to Zhao Chen, a patent examiner at SIPO, that the proposed fund of SIPO is not enough to help Chinese enterprises in dealing with the patent litigation.

"A patent lawsuit in the United States could easily spend $6 to 7 million, and the limited financial strength of SIPO cannot support such big spending for many enterprises," said Zhao. The proposed SIPO fund would mainly play a symbolic role, encouraging Chinese companies to cope with international legal challenges related to patents, he said.

Zhao revealed that with the help of the Ministry of Commerce, SIPO has already worked out a guidebook on international patent litigation for Chinese firms, containing messages from practical recommendations to the contact information of the major US and European patent law firms.

Despite the measures and the planned litigation fund, Zhao said Chinese companies that will actively respond to patent litigations would not be many.

"[Being involved in] any lawsuit is a result of balancing costs and benefits. The profit for Chinese manufacturers in the international market has already been very thin, and they would hardly insist on lawsuits for the small profit," Zhao told Intellectual Property Watch.

He added that to make Chinese enterprises more positively cope with international IPR lawsuits, the collective force coordinated by industry associations is very important, but now Chinese industry associations are still too weak and reluctant to organise the activities, partly due to the difficulty in sharing costs and benefits.

While welcoming the SIPO's move to help enterprises deal with IPR litigation, Chen Naiwei, director of the IPR Research Centre at Shanghai Jiaotong University, thinks the measures on foreign IPR litigation should not be prioritised.

"For a latecomer like China in the world of patents, the key issue is to help patent applications avoid or get around the barriers set by the existing patents and reflect added innovation," said Chen. "Only in this way, the possible subsequent lawsuits can have a substantial basis."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Online Games Alliance Against Piracy

2007-09-14T14:52:00.000+08:00

Online game companies form anti-piracy group

The Alliance Against Piracy will propose industry-wide policies and practices and lobby lawmakers to enact anti-piracy legislation. The Beijing-based alliance also includes four Korean game makers and an Icelandic firm.

CDC Games and Leading Game Developers Form Alliance to Protect Online Game Industry from Piracy

What interests me is that CDC Games has reportedly helped the China government convict two operators of "piracy for profit" of one of their online fantasy games, resulting in criminal convictions including prison sentences and fines.

"The first case, known as the 'Tianzi case' involved a private server operator that was running illegal copies of the MIR III game online. The conviction of the operator included the seizure of all their equipment and a three-year prison sentence.

The second case, known as the '007 case', recently concluded in August 2007 with a six-year prison sentence and a fine of US $67,000. In this case, the operator was running an illegal macro program that allowed players to purchase online game merchandise such as special powers and weapons. "

Compulsory Licensing of Patents

2007-09-14T14:01:00.000+08:00

James Packard Love, Knowledge Ecology International Research Note:
Recent examples of the use of compulsory licenses on patents

"This paper reports on a number of recent examples of the use of compulsory licenses, in both developed and developing economies. The examples cover a wide variety of technologies, legal mechanisms, and grounds for non-voluntary authorizations to use patents."

As regards China, it used the threat to a compulsory license to obtain voluntary licenses to manufacture generic Tamiflu in 2005.

植物新品种保护收费大幅降低

2007-09-10T16:48:00.000+08:00

国家发展改革委、财政部关于调整植物新品种保护权收费标准有关问题的通知

“农业部、国家林业局在受理、审查和授予植物新品种保护权时，向申请人分别收取植物新品种保护权申请费、审查费、年费的收费标准调整为：

植物新品种保护权申请费，每个品种由1800元降为1000元；审查费每个品种由4600元降为2500元；在保护期内，年费为第1-6年每年1000元、以后每年1500元。除此之外，农业部、国家林业局不得再向申请人收取测试费等其他任何费用。”

发改委：植物新品种保护收费大幅降低

“国家林业局植物新品保护办公室周建仁处长介绍，我国的植物新品种保护收费标准比专利权收费要高，收费标准甚至高于一些花卉产业发达国家。相反，我国的植物新品种在市场的售价又普遍低于国外市场。这种状况致使我国新品种保护数量偏低。

根据全国人大代表的提案，国家发改委、农业部和国家林业局相关部门组成调研组进行专门调研认为，我国新品种保护收费标准确实偏高。”

No to Patent Reform on Youtube

2007-09-07T19:24:00.000+08:00

Innovation vs Monopoly - "NO" on current patent changes

Dennis Crouch, Associate Professor of Law of University of Missouri, asked such a question: "Can Apple & Microsoft combine forces to create a better video about the harms caused by today’s patent laws - and will they allow it to be posted on youtube?"

Different Perspective

2007-09-06T15:50:00.000+08:00

How Adidas' IP Enforcer Kicked Counterfeiting in China: Athletic shoe maker's Asia IP guru says he doesn't have a counterfeiting problem in China - what's he doing right?

"While its competitors continue to focus on raiding factories, Adidas has increasingly targeted retailers and wholesalers. Adidas' China-based in-house lawyers work with the business side to make shoes harder to copy (by using a state-of-the-art label), and with outside investigators to build cases and prod government enforcement. It's all done on an annual budget of less than $1 million."

"However, raids are just part of Adidas' in-house IPR approach. 'If you're only thinking about raiding,' Ray Tai, head of Adidas' intellectual property rights enforcement in Asia, says, 'you, as a lawyer, are not doing your job.' Attorneys should be preventing problems as well as solving them, he observes."

I concur.

Anti-Monopoly Law of the PRC Comes

2007-08-31T10:00:00.000+08:00

中华人民共和国反垄断法

China Passes Antitrust Law, to Scrutinize More Deals：

"Whether the law makes foreign investors' lives more difficult depends on how it's implemented, Jonathan Palmer, regional managing director for U.S. law firm Heller Ehrman LLP said. 'Where the rubber meets the road is in the enforcement,' he said. 'At the moment, we don't know how it's going to be enforced. But overall the law is a significant step forward and is in compliance with international standards.'"

中国新反垄断法引来种种疑问

于泽远：明年八月实施国企和跨国企业将受反垄断法遏制

何禹欣：中国反垄断虚多实少

“虽然立意甚高，《反垄断法》在中国到底能达到什么样的效果，令人存疑。就法条本身而言，留待解释空间太大，可操作性很差。中国美国商会认为，新法亟需得到多种配套法规的阐释，其中便包含了对交易进行竞争和国家安全审查的程序，和美国尤其关心的对滥用知识产权如何定义及惩处。一位中国法律专家指出，中国已具备最完备的知识产权法和环境保护法，但执行效果却聊胜于无。”

第五十五条　经营者依照有关知识产权的法律、行政法规规定行使知识产权的行为，不适用本法；但是，经营者滥用知识产权，排除、限制竞争的行为，适用本法。

Article 55 deals with the abuse of the IPRs, applicable to the undertakings that eliminate or restrict market competition beyond the laws and administrative regulations on intellectual property rights.

The three major intellectual property laws in China, namely, Copyright Law, Patent Law, and Trademark Law, are directly impacted by the Anti-Monopoly Law.

More info about the Law is available here.

《科学技术进步法（修订草案）（征求意见稿）》

2007-08-29T20:43:00.000+08:00

法制办就科学技术进步法（修订草案）征求意见

万钢：四大原因催生科技进步法修订草案

修改或补充的内容多次涉及知识产权：

第八条　国家建立和完善知识产权制度，营造尊重知识产权的社会环境，激励自主创新。

第二十八条　国家通过财政、税收、金融、外汇等政策，引导和扶持创业风险投资机构对高新技术产业进行投资。

国家通过建立创业板股票交易市场和引导、规范技术产权交易等措施，建立和完善促进自主创新的多层次资本市场体系。

第三十一条　国家培育和发展技术市场，引导建立社会化、专业化和网络化的技术交易服务体系，鼓励创办从事技术评估、技术经纪等活动的技术交易服务机构，推动科学技术成果转移和应用。

第三十四条国家采取措施鼓励企业研究开发新技术、新产品、新材料、新工艺，组织开展合理化建议、技术改进和技术协作活动，进行技术改造和设备更新，吸收和开发新技术，创造、管理、保护、运用知识产权，提高产品、服务质量，在市场竞争中创立知名品牌，提高劳动生产率和经济效益。

第三十九条　国家政策性金融机构应当对国家规定的自主创新项目给予重点支持；国家利用基金等方式，为贷款提供贴息、担保，引导商业金融机构支持企业自主创新与企业技术产业化。

国家鼓励金融机构开展知识产权质押业务。

第四十二条　制定政府指导价和政府定价，应当平等对待国内、国外企业拥有知识产权的产品、服务，不得歧视。

第四十三条制定国家标准和行业标准应当吸收企业参加。

国家鼓励企业在市场竞争中通过技术创新形成企业标准，支持企业参与国际标准的制定。

第六十九条利用财政性资金设立的科学技术基金、科学技术计划项目的管理机构，应当对项目实施情况进行抽查、验收；抽查、验收时应当查看项目实施情况的原始记录。

除影响知识产权保护和国家秘密的保守的情形外，利用财政性资金设立的科学技术基金、科学技术计划项目的管理机构应当及时向社会公布抽查或者验收结果、项目产生的研究成果及其相关信息，公众有权查阅。

第七十条除国家另有规定或者合同另有约定的外，实施利用财政性资金设立的科学技术基金项目、科学技术计划项目产生的知识产权，由项目承担者享有；特殊情况下，国家可以无偿使用或者指定单位有偿使用。

项目承担者对项目产生的知识产权应当及时采取保护措施，加以运用，并就知识产权运用情况向项目管理机构提交年度报告。自知识产权取得之日起2年内，项目承担者未运用知识产权的，该知识产权归国家所有。

第七十一条　利用财政性资金设立的科学技术基金项目、科学技术计划项目产生的知识产权，向境外的个人和组织转让应当经国务院科学技术行政部门批准。

第七十八条　国家建立科学技术保密制度，实行科学技术保密工作责任制，建立健全科学技术保密补偿机制，加强对重大科学技术项目秘密事项及相关人员参与国际交流和合作的管理，保护涉及国家安全和公共利益的科学技术秘密。

国家严格控制珍贵的生物种质资源、遗传资源以及其他重要资源出境。

Property Rights and Patent Reform

2007-08-28T18:10:00.000+08:00

The Progress & Freedom Foundation Aspen Summit 2007 -

Panel Discussion: Property Rights and Patent Reform

Protecting IP in China

2007-08-27T19:39:00.000+08:00

The Stanford Program in Law, Science & Technology, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, and the Stanford Law Society of Silicon Valley present: Protecting IP in China (August 15, 2007)

中国知识产权法官代表团在美国斯坦福大学交流中国最高法院近年来审判的部分重要案例

Some highlights:

1. Ningbo Oriental Movement Factory vs. Jiangyin Jinling Hardware Co., Ltd. for retrial for patent infringement - the first case of the SPC to which the doctrine of equivalent was applied.

“When determining the protection scope of patent right, neither the protection scope of patent right should be limited to the rigid literary meaning of the Claims, nor the Claims be taken as just a technical guideline which can be explained freely. The protection scope of patent right for invention and utility model contains two aspects: (1) the scope determined by the indispensable technical features recorded in the Claims; and (2) the scope determined by the features equivalent to the indispensable technical features, i.e., comparing to the corresponding technical feature in the Claims, and by the basically same method, a technical feature can realize the basically same function and produce basically same effect, of which an ordinary person skilled in the art can take no creative effort to conceive. ”

2. Dalian Xin Yi Building Materials Co., Ltd. vs. Dalian Renda New Materials of Wall Factory for retrial for patent infringement - the SPC clearly denied applying the so-called “principle of superfluity establishing”.

“All the technical features that the patentee wrote in the Independent Claims are the indispensable technical features, which can not be ignored; therefore, these technical features should be brought into the comparison of technical features. This Court does not agree to use the so-called 'principle of superfluity establishing' recklessly. …… The public will be at a loss because of the unpredictable change of the contents of the patent. All technical features recorded in the Claims should be considered roundly and adequately, which could guarantee the stability of the legal rights, and guarantee the normal operation and the realization of the value of the patent system.”

3. Founder Group, etc. vs. Gao Shu Tianli Technology Co., Ltd., Gao Shu Technology Co., Ltd. for retrial for infringement of copyright of computer software - the SPC clarified issues for the legality of entrapped evidence in this case.

“In civil litigation, illegal activities have been explicitly defined by laws. However, despite of these explicit illegal activities and in the light of the universality of the social relationship and the complexity of the relationship of interests, laws do not exhaustively list all the activities that might be illegal. Laws authorize the judges the jurisdictional power to determine what kind of activities are illegal according to the balance of interests and the orientation of value. Therefore, with respect to those activities from which laws do not explicitly prevent, whether they are illegal or not could mainly be determined by their substantial justification.

For the current case, through the way of notarization, Founder has not only obtained evidence showing the whole process that Gao Shu installed the pirate copy of Founder’s computer software, but also has obtained evidence showing that Gao Shu sold pirate software to its other clients, and evidence or evidence clue on Gao Shu’s infringing activities of the same kind. The intention of Founder to obtain the above evidence is of justification. And these activities did not harm the public interests or other’s legal rights and interests as well.

In addition, the infringing activities against copyright of computer software feature high degree of concealment. It is also difficult to obtain related evidence. The entrapped evidence approach in this case is thus helpful to resolve the above problems. It also has effects on deterring and restricting such infringing activities, which meets the spirit of laws to legally protect the intellectual property.”

薛兆丰：知识产权与反垄断

2007-08-27T11:13:00.000+08:00

薛兆丰：知识产权与反垄断，2007年8月27日《经济观察报》“解释反垄断”专栏系列（之十八）

确实，“芝加哥学派”，张五常，CARL SHAPIRO，Richard J. Gilbert的相关论著，Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (April 1995), Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition (April 2007), 都是认识知识产权与反垄断的好读物。

WIPO PATENT REPORT 2007

2007-08-22T11:21:00.000+08:00

WIPO PATENT REPORT 2007 - Statistics on Worldwide Patent Activities

Some highlights in this report:

1 Very high growth rates in patent filings by applicants from North East Asian countries, particularly Korea and China. It is clear that this is a process that is ongoing.

2 Filings of PCT international applications from Korea and China have grown significantly since 2002, to the point where both countries are now within the top ten of origin of PCT international applications.

3 China’s ranking on Indicators of Patent Intensity, which compare patent filings with other indicators, namely population, GDP and R&D expenditures, remains low. These indicators allow for more meaningful cross-country comparisons by weighting the number of patents by different measures of country size and economic activity.

4 The increase in patent filings from newly industrialized countries does not yet translate into ownership of patent rights internationally by applicants from those countries. Of the approximately 5.6 million patents in force in 2005, 49% were owned by applicants from Japan and the United States. The major European countries are also strongly represented in ownership of patent rights.

5 Patent applications filed in the field of electricity and electronics represented 35% of worldwide patent filings between 2000 and 2005. Patent filings in this technology field are concentrated in the patent offices of Japan and the United States followed by Korea, the European Patent Office and China.

ECONOMIST: Benchmarking IT industry

2007-08-22T09:37:00.000+08:00

A report from the Economist Intelligence Unit: The means to compete - Benchmarking IT industry competitiveness

“The purpose of the IT industry competitiveness index is to compare countries in different regions of the world on the extent to which they possess the conditions necessary to support a strong IT industry. To achieve this, the Economist Intelligence Unit has built a benchmarking model which scores individual countries on the key attributes of a competitive IT sector.”

There are six categories of indicator used in the index. Among them stands the legal environment category, which includes comprehensiveness, transparency of IP legislation, adherence to treaties; enforcement of IP legislation; status of electronic signature legislation; status of national data privacy and anti-spam laws; and status of national cyber-crime laws.

Selected legal environment category scores are: United States 92.0; United Kingdom 88.5; Ireland 88.5; Germany 85.0; Japan 79.0; South Korea 66.0; China 49.0; India 48.0; Russia 38.5.

Some China-related views expressed in the report concerning IPRs:

Miller, Stanford University: “Companies complain about IP a lot but they still go there, and they protect themselves. They compartmentalise information so no one person can walk out the door with the complete story.”

Kagermann, SAP: “As China's homegrown companies begin to innovate, IP protection will be more rigorously enforced.”

Keith Collins, SAS: “They (MIT and Standford) no longer try to take an up-front value out of the IP - they take the risk of whether that IP will succeed in the marketplace, which makes it more likely that an entrepreneur can pick it up and succeed with it. Many universities have tried to drive revenue from IP, and that’s been a mistake.”

尹明善谈专利

2007-08-21T13:18:00.000+08:00

知识产权政府门户网站专题在线访谈：“完善地方专利法规，推行创新型城市建设”

重庆市政协副主席、力帆集团董事长尹明善：

“政府采购的时候要采购有自主知识产权的产品，一个企业研发新产品要打开市场的时候，我觉得政府采购要予以支持。”

“我认为有一个误区就是都认为所有的企业必须要努力搞一些专利技术，事实上绝大多数的中小企业是不可能的，他们是心有余而力不足，他们只有那么一点资金、那么一点科技力量，怎么来创造那么多的专利。”

“中国是一个发展中国家，中国有这么多弱小的中小企业，如果身为中国的官员、身为中国的知识产权保护的干部和立法者、实施者，不正视中小企业的弱小、不正视强国运用只对他们有利的东西欺压咱们中国这样的发展中国家，如果不奋力保护，我们就是傻瓜，我们永远就是一个发展中国家。”

“说到中国摩托车，包括重庆的摩托车，说80%都是仿造日本的，这个话我要做一个澄清。为什么呢？在80%中有99%是非专利技术，是专利保护期已经过了的技术，我们怎么不能用呢？比如说在全中国、重庆大量生产的CJ125的型号，这个原创来自日本，可是日本已经卖了20、30年了，人类的科学技术要发展，专利的保护一定有期限，不然就没有发展了。所以这里必须要澄清，不但中国的摩托车企业、绝大多数制造业都扣上了一个仿造、侵犯知识产权的帽子，这个不公正，他们的保护期过了，有的甚至是老祖宗的技术。”

“要理智的是，千万不要被人家吓住了，哪里有那么多的仿制呢？我们真正要为发展中国家说话，要呼吁世界各国把发明专利保护期缩短。因为信息时代，科学技术的发展很快，一个芝麻大的技术要保护10、20年这个合理吗？”

“在一次全国政协会议上我写了一个提案，我们国家专利申请的费用和国家的人均GDP不相称，太高昂了。就是申请多少钱、保护一年多少钱，像力帆这样的企业，每年要花几百万。我作为政协委员的一个提案希望缩减。”

U.S. Requests WTO Panel in China's IPR Case

2007-08-14T14:13:00.000+08:00

United States Requests WTO Panel in Case Challenging Deficiencies in China’s Intellectual Property Rights Laws

"First, the request challenges quantitative thresholds in China’s criminal law that must be met in order to start criminal prosecutions or obtain criminal convictions for copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting. Wholesalers and distributors are able to operate below these high thresholds without fear of criminal liability, so these thresholds effectively permit piracy and counterfeiting on a commercial scale.

Second, the panel request addresses the rules for disposal of IPR-infringing goods seized by Chinese customs authorities. Those rules appear to permit goods to be released into commerce following the removal of fake labels or other infringing features, when WTO rules dictate that these goods normally should be kept out of the marketplace altogether.

Third, the panel request addresses the apparent denial of copyright protection for works poised to enter the market but awaiting Chinese censorship approval. It appears that Chinese copyright law provides the copyright holder with no right to complain about copyright infringement (including illegal/infringing copies and unauthorized translations) before censorship approval is granted. Immediate availability of copyright protection is critical to protect new products from pirates, who – unlike legitimate producers – do not wait for the Chinese content review process to be completed."

"The U.S. panel request will be considered by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body at its next meeting, which is scheduled for August 31."

Productivity in Patent Offices

2007-08-09T11:05:00.000+08:00

Ernst & Young: Benchmarking Project – Productivity of the EPO, UKIPO & DPMA

Managing Intellectual Property: EPO productivity woes revealed

“Ernst & Young in cooperation with Management Team has been engaged by the European Patent Office (EPO) to conduct a benchmarking study on the productivity of the EPO and the national patent offices UKIPO (United Kingdom) and DPMA (Germany). This benchmarking study included the comparison of legal environments, the comparison of the patent granting processes and the analysis of productivity, measured by ‘time per action’-type of indicators, and productivity drivers, measured by specific key performance indicators. The analysis found that EPO’s productivity falls significantly behind the level of the national offices and identified a 50% difference in productivity between the EPO and the national offices. This difference is to some extent caused by the methodical features, since effort for written opinions and the involvement of the examining division cannot be properly accounted for. The total effect of these features and eight other explanatory factors may explain a productivity difference of 35% – 45% with two factors remaining that may be able to explain the residual.”

A detailed analysis of quantitative data on the patent granting process, the core of the project, is performed, including development of a methodology for measuring and comparing productivity, as well as findings of the root causes of the identified differences.

The statistics of certain productivity measures, such as time per product, time per communication, and of certain productivity drivers, such as experience of patent examiners, sickness days, adequacy of initial file allocation, communication per grant/refusal/withdrawal, oral proceedings per grant/refusal/withdrawal, are all of value.

The benchmarking results and recommendations are also applicable to SIPO to a great extent.

Grant rates in the patent office

2007-08-08T09:41:00.000+08:00

MARK A. LEMLEY, BHAVEN N. SAMPAT: Is the Patent Office a Rubber Stamp?

"While it grants patents to more than two-thirds of those who apply, the USPTO is not a rubber stamp. It rejects a small but non-trivial percentage of applications (15-20%), and more applications are abandoned for business reasons. …… Further, in a significant number of cases – around 40% of those that issue – the prosecution process requires the applicant to amend the claims, presumably generally to make them narrower.”

“We also find that the likelihood of obtaining a patent varies significantly by industry in surprising ways. For example, patents are much more likely to be granted in the chemical and pharmaceutical industries than in software and computer fields.” “Overall, those industries that are most identified with bad patents (computer software, hardware, and business methods) turn out to be those with the lowest grant rates.”

“Our findings certainly suggest that debates about patent system reform need to move beyond a narrow focus on the grant rate. They also suggest that published patent application data and PAIR transaction/status data are a rich and unexplored source of information for examining the law and economics of the patent system, and firm and industry level patent strategies.”

Notes 1: The grant rate statistics of USPTO is similar to that of SIPO, according to my observation.
2: SIPO lacks a database system like PAIR, which limits its further capacity building.

My humble translation for Asia Business Intelligence

2007-08-08T09:26:00.000+08:00

Asia Business Intelligence:

Guangdong Court Applies Hong Kong Law in Commercial Lease Dispute

India Rejects Novartis's Gleevec Patent Bid

2007-08-07T15:45:00.000+08:00

Bloomberg: Novartis's Gleevec Patent Challenge Rejected in India

"The patent for Gleevec/Glivec - granted in nearly 40 countries, including Russia and China - was denied in India in 2006. ……Novartis said it probably won't appeal today's decision to the country's supreme court."

SciDev.Net: Victory for generics in Indian patent case

"Leena Menghaney, from the India office of MSF, told SciDev.Net that India sets an example to the rest of the developing world in setting standards for TRIPS and safeguards to protect the rights of access to treatment for the poor."

Novartis concerned Indian court ruling will discourage investments in innovation needed to bring better medicines to patients:

"1 Court dismisses Novartis petition challenging constitutionality of Section 3(d); defers to World Trade Organization (WTO) to resolve question on TRIPS compliance;
2 Gleevec/Glivec patent appeal not decided; Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) review continues as separate proceeding."

Section 3(d) of The Patents Act of India states:

"The following are not inventions within the meaning of this Act, - (d) the mere discovery of a new form of a known substance which does not result in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance or the mere discovery of any new property or new use for a known substance or of the mere use of a known process, machine or apparatus unless such known process results in a new product or employs at least one new reactant.

Explanation - For the purposes of this clause, salts, esters, ethers, polymorphs, metabolites, pure form, particle size, isomers, mixtures of isomers, complexes, combinations and other derivatives of known substance shall be considered to be the same substance, unless they differ significantly in properties with regard to efficacy."

Not just copyright：Citizen translation of Harry Potter 7

2007-08-02T14:48:00.000+08:00

IHT.com: Lots of Harry Potter books in China, not all of them by the author

EastSouthWestNorth: Self-Organized Citizen Translations of Harry Potter 7

青年周末：大中学生成《哈7》民间翻译主力

Shanghai Daily: Potter novel translation posted online

国际巫师联盟_peop.cn：“翻译组即日解散，翻译活动因种种原因不得不停止!!!”

I did see pirated Harry Potter 7 sold by street vendors in Beijing several days ago. But, the problem is not simply copyright violation from the legal perspective concerning these citizen translations.

Recommended debate

2007-07-26T20:12:00.000+08:00

WTO FORUM: Does the TRIPS agreement strike the right balance?

General exclusion order directed to lighters

2007-07-26T17:42:00.000+08:00

Inv. No. 337-TA-575: the U.S. International Trade Commission has issued a general exclusion order directed to infringing lighters.

The investigation was instituted on June 20, 2006, based on a complaint, as supplemented, filed by Zippo, alleging section 337 violations by reason of infringement of United States Trademark Registration No. 2,606,241.

Named respondents from China include Tung Fong International Promotion Co., Ltd. of Hong Kong（東方國際推銷有限公司）; Wenzhou Star Smoking Set Co., Ltd. of China（浙江省温州市站前星星烟具有限公司）; Taizhou Rongshi Lighter Development Co., Ltd. of China（台州荣时打火机发展有限公司）; and Wenzhou Tailier Smoking Set Co., Ltd. of China（温州泰利尔烟具制造有限公司）. Wenzhou Star Smoking Set Company was terminated from the investigation on the basis of settlement agreements.

On February 21, the ALJ issued an ID finding the domestic industry requirement satisfied, and a violation of section 337. The Commission has recently determined that the appropriate form of relief is a general exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of lighters that infringe the '241 mark.

China-U.S. joint piracy investigation

2007-07-26T14:54:00.000+08:00

中美联合开展“夏至”行动破获两起特大跨国盗版犯罪案件

“2007年7月6日至16日，中国公安机关与美国联邦调查局开展代号‘夏至’的联合行动，成功破获两起特大跨国生产、销售盗版软件的犯罪案件。中国公安机关现已缉捕犯罪嫌疑人25名，缴获盗版母碟22张，盗版Vista、Office2007、Norton Systemworks等软件光盘、真品证书（COA）、防伪标签等共计36万张（件），冻结、查封涉案资金、车辆、房产等价值6000余万元人民币。同时，美国联邦调查局已经执行了24项搜查令和资产扣押令，查获价值200多万美元的盗版软件，扣押了超过70万美元的资产，对犯罪嫌疑人的缉捕行动将在美国内逐步展开。此次中美联合执法行动是目前全球打击高品质软件盗版活动的最大、最成功的执法行动。”

INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED JOINTLY BY FBI AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES IN PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA RESULTS IN MULTIPLE ARRESTS IN CHINA AND SEIZURES OF COUNTERFEIT MICROSOFT AND SYMANTEC SOFTWARE

"Operation Summer Solstice encompasses multiple investigations currently being conducted by the FBI in Los Angeles and the MPS, Economic Crime Investigation Department (ECID), in which criminal organizations responsible for manufacturing and distributing counterfeit software have been identified in both Shanghai and Shenzhen; as were distributors located in the United States."

"FBI Agents assigned to Los Angeles and the FBI’s Legal Attache Office located in Beijing, China, provided information and substantial assistance in support of the investigation conducted by the MPS, ECID located in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen China. "

"The joint investigation was facilitated and supported by the IP Criminal Enforcement Working Group of the U.S.-China Joint Liaison Group for law enforcement, which is co-chaired by the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and the PRC, MPS. The Working Group is dedicated to increasing cooperation in intellectual property law enforcement efforts and pursuing more joint US-China cross-border criminal enforcement operations."

FT: China joins FBI in piracy operation

MICROSOFT: Raids in Southern China Target $2 Billion Global Software Counterfeiting Syndicate

SIPO：人大建议政协提案办理工作

2007-07-17T17:36:00.000+08:00

国家知识产权局官方网站开设“人大建议政协提案办理工作”专栏

“为了让公众了解我局办理建议、提案的具体情况，便于人大、政协以及社会各界对我局工作实施监督，‘人大建议政协提案办理工作’今起开栏。我局每年将把当年的人大建议、政协提案情况的综合分析以及我局答复的要点及时摘要刊登，供大家参阅。”

国家知识产权战略浮出水面

2007-07-13T10:46:00.000+08:00

知识产权局局长：实施知识产权战略提升自主创新能力

实施国家知识产权战略的总体思路和措施：

“国家知识产权战略的研究制定工作，于2005年6月正式启动，到目前已取得重大进展。按照国务院的部署，国家知识产权战略纲要将于今年年内出台。

国家知识产权战略的总体思路是以知识产权制度的安排为核心，着力完善知识产权法律体系和配套政策，创造良好的知识产权法治环境，促进我国对世界范围知识资源的有效利用，最终目标是大幅度提升我国知识产权的创造、运用、保护和管理能力，知识产权制度对科技创新、经济发展和文化繁荣的促进作用充分显现，大力提升国家核心竞争力。

为确保上述目标的实现，应采取如下主要措施：完善知识产权法律法规体系；健全知识产权执法体系；确立经济、科技、贸易中知识产权导向政策；提高市场主体管理和运用知识产权的综合能力；加强知识产权体制机制建设，优化政府知识产权管理；加强知识产权信息传播利用基础设施建设，强化知识产权信息公共服务；构建知识产权中介服务体系；加强知识产权文化和人才队伍建设；改善我国知识产权国际环境。

国家知识产权战略是国家的基本战略之一，与科教兴国、可持续发展战略、人才强国战略等国家总体战略相互补充、相互依存、相互促进，共同服务于国家经济、社会发展的全局。国家知识产权战略的实施，需要从中央到地方各部门以及社会各界的鼎力配合，通力协作，共同完成这项惠及亿万人民群众的伟大事业。”

EU-China: mutual recognition and protection of GIs

2007-07-12T17:53:00.000+08:00

Geographical indications becoming clearer

China, EU recognize geographical specialities

"It was the first time the two sides had pursued the 'bilateral registration' of geographic indications (GIs), but both of them emphasized that the official registration would be subject to an examination period from 12 to 18 months."

国家质检总局与欧盟地理标志产品保护合作取得实质性进展首批中欧各10个产品可望受到专门保护

此次，中方提交的产品名单包括：平谷大桃、龙口粉丝、龙井茶、陕西苹果、东山白芦笋、琯溪蜜柚、金乡大蒜、镇江香醋、蠡县麻山药、盐城龙虾。

欧方提交的产品名单包括：West Country farm cheddar（农舍奶酪）、White stilton cheese/blue stilton cheese（斯提尔顿奶酪）、Scottish farmed salmon（苏格兰农家三文鱼）、Prosciutto di Parma（帕尔玛火腿）、Grana Padano（帕加诺奶酪）、Pruneau d‘Agen-Pruneauxd’Agen mi-cuits（阿让李子干）、Roquefort（洛克福奶酪）、Comte（孔蒂奶酪）、Sierra Mágina（马吉娜橄榄油）、Priego de Córdoda（科多瓦橄榄油）。

软件著作权登记

2007-07-12T17:35:00.000+08:00

软件登记数量上半年又创新高

“截止到2007年6月30日，今年上半年全国计算机软件登记数量达11414件，同比增长了8.21%，为历年登记数量之最。在各种软件登记中，软件著作权登记数量为10842件，占登记总量的94.99%。

根据登记人所在地区情况统计，全国软件著作权登记数量列前十位的省、自治区和直辖市分别是：

第一位北京市，登记数量为3962件，同比增长了7.28%，占登记总量的34.71%；

第二位广东省，登记数量为1365件，同比增长了9.73%，占登记总量的11.96%；

第三位上海市，登记数量为1261件，同比增长了13.30%，占登记总量的11.92%；

第四位浙江省，登记数量为858件，同比增长了5.15%，占登记总量的7.52%；

第五位江苏省，登记数量为750件，同比增长了32.51%，占登记总量的6.57%。

列第六位至第十位的分别是：福建省（391件）、山东省（336件）、湖北省（258件）、四川省（216件）和天津市（174件）。

列前五位的均为沿海经济发达地区，这五个地区软件著作权登记数量占整个登记总量的72.68%。据了解，上述排列顺序与各地在全国软件发展规模和水平中所占地位基本吻合。”

背景1：软件登记的事项作为初步证明，为软件企业在证明权利归属，以及在享受国家产业优惠政策提供帮助等方面发挥着重要作用。软件著作权登记工作也列入了国家鼓励和发展软件产业的政策和发展纲要之中。

背景2：中国版权保护中心是国家版权局认定的负责全国软件著作权登记工作的唯一机构。目前，一个软件从提出申请到登记完毕的周期已经从原来的60天缩短为现在的30天。

《北京市展会知识产权保护办法》

2007-07-10T15:21:00.000+08:00

7月4日至7月21日：《北京市展会知识产权保护办法》对外征求意见

展会历来是知识产权保护的重地。

一个小企业老板的仿冒攻坚战：

“Brababy还受到来自韩国和土耳其的仿冒品的威胁，这一点证明了中国远非世界上唯一一个知识产权的战场，但它却是世界上风险最高的市场之一。因此，恩格尔已经向仿冒者宣战。今年4月，他带着塞满了商标和设计专利文件的公文包来到中国最大的出口交易会──广交会。他的使命是：走遍交易会的3万余家参展摊位，找出向进口商廉价出售Brababy仿冒品的中国公司。

没多久，恩格尔就发现中基宁波对外贸易股份有限公司（Ningbo Foreign Trade Co.）在以每件45美分的价格出售数以万计的Brababy仿冒品。恩格尔假扮成买主，问了几个关于产品的问题，然后拿了一本宣传册，便冲进了交易会的知识产权投诉办公室，在那里，他得知自己缺乏证明自己身份的必要文件。……

恩格尔再次返回广州并前往香港，进行第二轮的查探，他发现另外八家贸易公司也在展销BraBaby仿冒产品，而且是面向海外市场。在他最近的这次查探旅程中，他有35个小时是在飞机上度过的。

恩格尔说，在他下一次‘进军’中国时，他会准备好所有的文件，包括证明他与公司关系的文件原件。……

恩格尔说，迄今为止他已经花了约12.5万美元在美国、欧盟、澳大利亚、新西兰、中国台湾、香港以及中国大陆为BraBaby的专利、版权和商标进行注册。但仿冒者众多，而且那些公司能够迅速消失，然后以另一个名字重新出现。”

国家版权局颁布2007年1号公告

2007-07-10T14:29:00.000+08:00

国家版权局发布《要求删除或断开链接侵权网络内容的通知》及《要求恢复被删除或断开链接的网络内容的说明》示范格式

《要求删除或断开链接侵权网络内容的通知》及《要求恢复被删除或断开链接的网络内容的说明》是国家版权局根据《信息网络传播权保护条例》第14条、第16条的规定，细化“书面通知” 和“书面说明” 的内容而制订的指导性格式范本，仅向社会推荐使用。

要求删除或断开链接侵权网络内容的通知（示范格式）

《要求删除或断开链接侵权网络内容的通知》填写说明

要求恢复被删除或断开链接的网络内容的说明（示范格式）

《要求恢复被删除或断开链接的网络内容的说明》填写说明

其实，搜索引擎早已出台了各自的权利通知与反通知政策。仔细比较之下，有不少值得玩味之处，尤其是Google的做法。

百度著作权保护声明

Google's Policy on Digital Millennium Copyright Act

Yahoo!'s Copyright and Intellectual Property Policy

附记，最近关于信息网络传播权的一个新突破：Belgium Reins in Filesharing: Belgian ISPs to be held responsible for copyright infringement on their networks.

"A Belgian court has ruled that an internet service provider must block illegal, peer-to-peer filesharing on its network. The ruling is the first in Europe to hold an ISP accountable for copyright-infringing traffic and it will likely ripple across the EU, according to London-based IFPI, a counterpart of the Recording Industry Association of America."

Release of GPLv3

2007-07-05T20:47:00.000+08:00

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007

Richard Stallman: Why Upgrade to GPLv3 (Chinese Version)

Two critical issues are addressed by GPLv3:

"Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run modified versions of the software inside them, although the manufacturer can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the aim of protecting users' freedom to change the software. The systematic pattern of such abuse occurs in the area of products for individuals to use, which is precisely where it is most unacceptable. Therefore, we have designed this version of the GPL to prohibit the practice for those products. If such problems arise substantially in other domains, we stand ready to extend this provision to those domains in future versions of the GPL, as needed to protect the freedom of users.

Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents. States should not allow patents to restrict development and use of software on general-purpose computers, but in those that do, we wish to avoid the special danger that patents applied to a free program could make it effectively proprietary. To prevent this, the GPL assures that patents cannot be used to render the program non-free."

新颁《劳动合同法》

2007-07-04T10:07:00.000+08:00

中华人民共和国劳动合同法

（2007年6月29日第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十八次会议通过，自2008年1月1日起施行）

保密与竞业限制（Confidentiality & Non-Competition）：

第二十三条

用人单位与劳动者可以在劳动合同中约定保守用人单位的商业秘密和与知识产权相关的保密事项。

对负有保密义务的劳动者，用人单位可以在劳动合同或者保密协议中与劳动者约定竞业限制条款，并约定在解除或者终止劳动合同后，在竞业限制期限内按月给予劳动者经济补偿。劳动者违反竞业限制约定的，应当按照约定向用人单位支付违约金。

第二十四条

竞业限制的人员限于用人单位的高级管理人员、高级技术人员和其他负有保密义务的人员。竞业限制的范围、地域、期限由用人单位与劳动者约定，竞业限制的约定不得违反法律、法规的规定。

在解除或者终止劳动合同后，前款规定的人员到与本单位生产或者经营同类产品、从事同类业务的有竞争关系的其他用人单位，或者自己开业生产或者经营同类产品、从事同类业务的竞业限制期限，不得超过二年。

K. Lesli Ligorner from Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP：用好中国的竞业限制协议

SECTION 337 INVESTIGATION ON CERTAIN NITRILE GLOVES

2007-06-29T17:06:00.000+08:00

ITC INSTITUTES SECTION 337 INVESTIGATION ON CERTAIN NITRILE GLOVES

The investigation is based on a complaint filed by Tillotson Corporation d/b/a Best Manufacturing Company of Menlo, GA, on May 30, 2007. The complainant requests that the ITC issue a permanent general exclusion order and permanent cease and desist orders.

Identified respondents from China in this investigation include:

Beijing Huateng Rubber Plastic of China（北京华腾橡塑乳胶制品有限公司）;
Ideal Healthcare Group Co. Ltd. of China;
and JDA (Tianjin) Plastic Rubber Co. Ltd. of China（兰奇天津塑胶有限公司）.

Sisvel & Aigo

2007-06-29T15:37:00.000+08:00

Time for a Reverse Patent Troll to seek invalidation of Sisvel mp3 patents?

MP3不缴费就封柜 CeBIT展上演专利惊魂

Sisvel代理爱国者专利全球推广

Aigo acquires Sisvel license

What interests me is "A Reverse Patent Troll, seeking invalidation of the Philips’ mp3 patents asserted by Sisvel against major consumer electronics companies". Caution is needed in evaluating this proposal due to the complex dynamics among the licensor, licensee, and consumer.

COMMUNITY CUSTOMS ACTIVITIES ON COUNTERFEIT AND PIRACY

2007-06-29T14:18:00.000+08:00

European Commission's Taxation and Customs Union: SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY CUSTOMS ACTIVITIES ON COUNTERFEIT AND PIRACY - RESULTS AT THE EUROPEAN BORDER 2006

Some highlights:

1 "In terms of overall quantities seized, China remains the main source for counterfeit goods, with over 80% of all articles seized coming from there. However, it should be noted that with regard to the number of cases treated by customs, the selection is far more widespread and China only accounts for a third of the cases."

2 "In the medicines sector, India is the number one source, followed by the United Arab Emirates and China. Together these 3 sources are responsible for more than 80% of all counterfeit medicines. In other cases, other countries predominate; in the food sector Turkey remains the main source and in the electrical equipment sector Malaysia has become the main source."

The summary points out that "reliable figures are required, in order to be able to better understand the scope and extent of the problem, which has become a global phenomenon. To this end, the Commission is committed to ensuring that relevant statistical data on customs actions in the EU is analysed and shared with customs in a timely manner. In addition, the Commission will continue to pursue the possibility of exchanging such data with customs in third countries, in accordance with relevant customs cooperation provisions that apply."

In May, U.S., China Customs Agreed to Combat Global Trade in Counterfeit Goods during the second meeting of the Sino-U.S. Strategic Economic Dialogue. This memorandum of cooperation on intellectual property rights calls for, among other things,

1 exchange of significant intellectual property rights seizures information each quarter in order to track violators and conduct enforcement actions. The country receiving information will have 90 days to report to the providing country on enforcement actions resulting from this disclosure of information.

2 exchange of counterfeit and pirated goods seizure statistics every six months for goods originating in or destined for the other country. The statistics exchange will describe the number of seizures, quantity and value of goods, description and/or Harmonized Tariff Schedule classification of the commodities, mode of transportation and the main ports of import and export for the goods in the two countries.

Mu Xinsheng, Minister of Customs for the General Administration of Customs of the People’s Republic of China, told some background stories about the Sino-U.S. customs cooperation in an interview:

"美国对我们的知识产权保护，包括海关的知识产权边境保护一向颇多指责，态度强硬。最常见的是拿美国海关查获的源于中国的侵权产品说话。我们曾一再要求美方将其查获与我国有关的进口侵权货物的信息向我方通报，以便中国海关有针对性地加强执法，但是一直没有得到有效的回应。

2006年12月中旬，美方向我们提出了签订中美双方海关知识产权执法合作备忘录的要求，并提供了合作备忘录的建议文本。由于今年４月初美方决定将中美知识产权争端提交WTO争端解决机制解决，中美海关知识产权保护执法合作备忘录工作曾一度暂停。"

See THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY PART IV. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY produced by OECD from a global, economic view.

版权贸易逆差

2007-06-28T17:27:00.000+08:00

新闻出版总署报告显示我国版权贸易逆差依然巨大

以下摘自“2006年全国新闻出版业基本情况”：

1、2006年全国共引进出版物版权12386种，其中图书10950种，期刊540种，录音制品150种，录像制品108种，电子出版物174种，软件434种，电影29种，电视节目1种。

图书版权引进地情况如下：美国2957种，英国1296种，德国303种，法国253种，俄罗斯38种，加拿大40种，新加坡156种，日本484种，韩国315种，香港地区144种，澳门地区2种，台湾地区749种，其他地区4213种。

2、2006年全国共输出出版物版权2057种，其中图书2050种，期刊2种，电子出版物5种。

图书版权输出地情况如下：美国147种，英国66种，德国104种，法国14种，俄罗斯66种，加拿大25种，新加坡47种，日本116种，韩国363种，香港地区119种，澳门地区53种，台湾地区702种，其他地区228种。(说明：以上统计未含香港、澳门、台湾地区的相关统计数据。)

版权贸易逆差危局外版图书中国市场持续性高烧

引进十本输出一本：中国书业贸易逆差之痛

版权贸易中进口多出口少：中国图书要学会卖版权

SIPO does not handle patent infringement disputes

2007-06-22T20:44:00.000+08:00

Mr. Danny Friedmann's paper "How to work within China’s IPR enforcement system for trademark and design rights" takes SIPO as one of the administrative IPR enforcement routes in China:

"Article 3 Patent Law promulgates that the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) is responsible for the patent work throughout the country, including the enforcement of counterfeit patented products and patent infringement. Provincial offices generally deal with patent complaints. Pursuant to article 57 Patent Law when parties are unwilling to consult with each other or where the consultation fails, the parties may institute legal proceedings in the people’s court or request SIPO to handle the matter. When an infringement is established, SIPO may order an injunction and upon request of the parties mediate in the amount of compensation for the damage caused by the infringement. ... Where a person passes off the patent of another, he shall be ordered by SIPO, pursuant to article 58 Patent Law, to amend his act. SIPO will confiscate the illegal earnings and may impose a fine of not more than three times the illegal earnings, or if there are no illegal earnings, a fine of not more than RMB 50,000. If the infringement constitutes a crime, SIPO will transfer the case to the People’s Security Bureau. SIPO has limited enforcement resources. Therefore, it has less power than the other administrative bodies."

The patent administration department under the State Council, namely SIPO, is responsible for the patent work throughout the country, including receiving and examination of patent applications and grant of patent rights for inventions-creations, but excluding "the enforcement of counterfeit patented products and patent infringement".

SIPO NEVER handles patent infringement disputes in China. The local administrative authority for patent affairs under the local governments takes the role.

SigmaTel, Actions Settle Patent Suits

2007-06-22T20:07:00.000+08:00

SigmaTel, Actions Settle Patent Suits

To quote: "The two companies dismissed all litigation pending against one another and reached a three-year cross license agreement. Financial terms are confidential."

A press release from Actions: Actions and SigmaTel Settle All Patent Litigation and Enter into Cross-License Agreement

Hsiang-Wei (David) Lee, Chief Financial Officer of Actions Semiconductor, has told Actions' litigation story at the Summit on Overseas Protection of Intellectual Property of Chinese Enterprises, part of the 2007 China High-Level Forum on Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Beijing this April. That speech was, in my view, quite helpful to Chinese enterprises' business strategy in terms of IP disputes.

IP & Antitrust

2007-06-21T17:39:00.000+08:00

最近，断断续续地在听 Oral History Task Force (This program is "established to permanently document the perspectives and memories of those who have figured prominently in the development of US antitrust law")，于是，就联想到国内知识产权与反垄断的一些讨论与报道。我以为，严肃的讨论，首先需要深刻地理解问题本身，无论是学理上的，还是实务上的，否则，是无法提出富于建设性的解决方案的。

今年4月，DOJ & FTC发布了ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: Promoting Innovation and Competition的报告，其中很多问题，比如Patent Hold Up, Patent Pool，国内的企业或多或少已经触及。AVS就是一个很好的例子。AVS工作组已经做了很多不错的工作：知识产权政策、关于AVS专利池管理的建议性规定、关于AVS专利池许可的建议性规定、会员缺省许可义务、会员提案专利披露与许可承诺、标准草案审阅期专利披露与许可承诺等等。这样的努力，让人鼓舞。据我所知，这些工作也得到了不少的外部帮助。

发展中国家的反垄断本来就是有争议的、新鲜的话题。在这种背景下，在中国，动辄就将知识产权与反垄断联系起来，这个调子或许定得太高了，相反，脚踏实地，理性地去尝试解决现实中的一个一个问题，可能才是正解。

毕竟，仅仅在《反垄断法（草案）》里写下“经营者依照有关知识产权的法律、行政法规行使知识产权的行为，不适用本法；但是，经营者滥用知识产权，排除、限制竞争的行为，适用本法。”，只是一个起点。

李书通为什么要这么做呢？

2007-06-15T10:28:00.000+08:00

商標訴訟、ヤマハ発動機が中国で勝訴

ヤマハバイク、商標権侵害で勝訴　中国で賠償額「最高」

剪不断理还乱——李书福家族矛盾显露冰山一角

在看了最高人民法院就浙江华田工业有限公司因与雅马哈发动机株式会社，台州华田摩托车销售有限公司、台州嘉吉摩托车销售有限公司、南京联润汽车摩托车销售有限公司商标侵权纠纷一案的民事判决书后，我想问的却是，李书通先生究竟为什么要这么做呢？

我想到了吴晓波先生写的《狼图腾的终结》，还有《中国企业失败的基因》：

“这些年，我一直在探寻中国企业失败的基因，现在，我称之为‘中国式失败’。

‘中国式失败’的前提是，存在一个独特的中国式商业环境。在过去的三十年里，中国一直处在一个剧烈转型的时代，法制在逐渐的建设和完善之中，冒险者往往需要穿越现行的某些法规，这造成很多商业行为都将在一种灰色的中间地带运行，企业家将遭遇商业之外的众多挑战。”

此外，《新兴市场公司创新面对的困难和对策》中的下述评论亦有见地：

“其实包括中国在内的很多新兴的国家是有知识产权立法的，但是很难执行。即使政府愿意执行这些法律，但是受保护的有商标的产品和普通仿制品价值差别非常大，消费者则非常支持这些仿制品。而大多数亚洲社会没有尊重无形商品的惯例，比如品牌、软件和业务模式，这样又加重了这个情况。但是，这也并不意味着创新者不需要寻找保护自己的方式，或者说不要阻止仿制者进行仿制。”

USPTO's pilot peer to patent project

2007-06-12T13:40:00.000+08:00

USPTO Releases Notice Setting Forth Rules for Pilot

Also in NYTimes:

"The patent office is experimenting with the concept of opening the examination process to outsiders, inviting public peer reviews. On June 15, Mr. Dudas said, the patent office will begin a pilot project for open reviews of software patents. The patents in the pilot program will be posted on a Web site, and members of the public with software expertise will be allowed to send the patent office technical references relevant to the patent claims.

But the pilot project applies only to patent applications in the field of information technology, and only with the approval of patent applicants. Legislative changes would be required to have public peer views without an applicant’s approval, and thus to extend the concept to other fields."

起初知道这个项目，是去年5月通过IBM的David J. Kappos在北大所作的一次学术报告。后来，IBM发布的"Building a New IP Marketplace - A Global Innovation Outlook 2.0 Report"也谈到了这个项目，其中的一组对话很是精彩：

“Community Patent Review is one of the most exciting and revolutionary changes to the patent system in decades. In today’s networked world, the wisdom of a wide array of experts—not just the examiner and the applicant—can be brought to bear in manageable and affordable ways.”
— Beth Noveck, New York Law School

“Community review is a very interesting idea which should be supported.”
— Charles Fish, Time Warner

“At first glance, Community Patent Review seems a good idea. But the experience in China suggests that it may not work well as we expect…The patent office found there were very few meaningful challenges coming from the public. So the 1992 patent law abolished this arrangement. So the problem is: Is there really a community full with technical experts and competent patent agents who are interested in the onerous work of patent review during their part-time?”
— Guobin Cui, Tsinghua University Law School

“The community is keenly interested in ensuring that patents don’t issue improperly in a way that will impinge upon their work. We have seen a lot of support thus far from technical professionals—I don’t think that will be a problem—also some participation is better than none.”
— Marc Ehrlich, IBM

“The intent of community review may be to foster a friendly community of volunteers willing to improve patent quality by pointing out uncited art, but when millions in R&D and patent filing fees are at stake, I believe that an open market economy will create an environment wherein competitive commercial interests will capitalize on the opportunity to invest in reviews for the express purpose of eliminating a competitor’s claims to a market.”
— Andy Gibbs, Patent Café

“The real challenge is the development of secondary institutions and resources that allow the market to self-organize.”
— Kevin Werbach, Wharton School of Business

崔老师的担心不无道理，毕竟中国的很多情况不同于美国。至于这个项目的实际效果如何，还是耐心等待相关的facts and figures吧。

Brazil's HIV drug compulsory license

2007-06-08T11:01:00.000+08:00

Brazil overrides Merck patent on HIV drug

The interaction between public health, innovation and intellectual property rights is of serious concern to governments, business and the general public. The Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health (CIPIH) established by the World Health Assembly in 2003 has already completed a compelling report on this complex issue with focuses on the intersections between intellectual property rights, innovation and public health.

In my presentation titled "TREND OF THE THIRD REVISION OF CHINA'S PATENT LAW AND ITS IMPACT ON CHINA’S PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY" at the First International China Biopharmaceutical Symposium (ICBPS) - development, regulatory approval, production, distribution - China and Worldwide held in December 2006, Beijing, I talked about the proposed changes in the draft third amendment of China's Patent Law (now handed to the State Council for further deliberation) on drug compulsory license. These revisions include, inter alia,

Article 49.

Where a national emergency or any extraordinary state of affairs occurs, or where the public interest so requires, the Patent Administration Department Under the State Council may, as suggested by a competent department under the State Council, grant the entity designated by the department a compulsory license to exploit the patent for invention or utility model.

In order to prevent, treat and control an epidemic disease, the Patent Administration Department Under the State Council may grant a compulsory license to exploit the patent for invention or utility model according to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

and Article 50.

Where a drug for treating an epidemic disease has been granted a patent in China, and a developing country or a least developed country who have no or insufficient capability to manufacture the said drug, hopes to import the drug from China, the Patent Administrative department Under the State Council may grant an entity which is qualified for exploitation, a compulsory license to manufacture the said drug and to export it to the said country.

Where the Patent Administrative department Under the State Council grants a compulsory license in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the said department shall clearly set forth relevant requirements in the decision on compulsory license.

不过，国家知识产权局条法司司长尹新天在最近会见美国礼来公司全球总裁约翰·勒奇莱特博士时表示，中国政府已注意到巴西和泰国政府开始采取强制许可措施来确保本国公众的卫生利益，但中国会慎重行使这类权利，决不会贸然行事。

飞利浦：“知识产权教席项目”

2007-06-05T18:57:00.000+08:00

飞利浦与复旦大学续签“知识产权教席项目”合作协议

昨夜，刚好粗略翻看了一篇关于知识产权教育的文章：Intellectual Property education – In the Law School and Beyond。

在Allan Huang和我去年合写的 “Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights of Industrial Design: Multinationals’ Strategy, Practice, and Concerns in China” (in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer-aided Industrial Design & Conceptual Design: Digital Techniques, Humanized Design, Regional Autonomous Innovation, p456-459, IEEE Press, Nov 2006, Hangzhou) 那篇文章中的OTHER INSTITUTIONAL AND CULTURAL CONCERNS RELATING TO DESIGN RIGHTS PROTECTION部分，我也说到了IP Education这个问题：

Multinationals are also taking initiatives to cultivate local IPR talents and enhance local IPR knowledge in China. In recent yeas, Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands has partnered with several leading Chinese law schools strong in IPR field, e.g., Renmin University, Tsinghua University, Fudan University, etc., to set up IP Academy aiming to promote Chinese IPR studies to cope with international competition. These programs involve, in these law schools, Philips’ selection and sponsorship of European IPR experts to teach IPR courses or give lectures, establishment of IPR scholarship, sponsorship of IPR Research, invitation of local professors to visit European universities, and support other IPR related projects and workshops. Multinationals see such educational efforts as an excellent opportunity and a long-term solution to drive China to improve its IPR situation. As one executive from one multinational company put it, “If we educate a hundred people on IP issues, they are going to tell a hundred more, and so on. The knock-on effect is unimaginable in scope. And that's how you reach every strata of society in a country as big as China.”

三年前，我也曾受益于飞利浦在清华法学院举办的IP Academy，那是我的知识产权启蒙课。

飞利浦的知识产权立场在国内常被人指责，像“飞利浦向中国教授‘低头’，承诺撤销争议专利”这样的报道屡见不鲜。我也常常在研讨会上听到其他跨国企业的知识产权高管批评飞利浦的一些做法。

但是，就“知识产权教席项目”而言，飞利浦的努力，我以为，值得称赞。

向世贸组织申诉？

2007-06-04T14:07:00.000+08:00

五一长假回京之后写的，刊登在《中国发展观察》2007年第6期。

4月24日，在2007中国保护知识产权高层论坛上，国务院副总理吴仪在谈到美国就中国的知识产权问题向世界贸易组织（WTO）提起申诉一事时，态度严厉，直言我国将“按照WTO相关规则积极应诉”，“奉陪到底”。美国政府是4月10日提出这一申诉的。目前，日本、欧盟、加拿大等先后要求加入这一申诉的磋商程序。

我国现行《刑法》规定，只有在情节“严重”、“特别严重”，或者涉案金额“较大”、“巨大”时，假冒商标和盗版者才会面临刑事制裁。至于何谓情节“严重”、“特别严重”，以及涉案金额“较大”、“巨大”，最高人民法院、最高人民检察院（简称“两高”）在2004年12月出台的有关司法解释中设定了具体门槛。美方认为，目前中国对于假冒商标和盗版的“非法经营数额”的认定，是按照侵权产品的标价或者实际售价计算的，而没有依照被侵权产品的市场价格来确定。因此，假冒商标和盗版者完全可以通过降低标价或者售价，来制售更多的侵权品，而逃避刑事制裁。这样，免责的门槛仍然设定在较低的水平，“商业规模”的造假售假得不到彻底打击。但是，根据“两高”今年4月4日新出台的司法解释，非法复制发行的复制品数量在500份以上的，无论“非法经营数额”如何，就已构成犯罪。

同时，申诉认为，按照我国《刑法》的规定，仅仅非法“复制”而不“发行”，或者仅仅“发行”而没有“复制”侵犯著作权的物品，可以免于刑事指控。实际上，新司法解释已经澄清了这一问题：“复制发行”的行为，包括复制、发行或者既复制又发行的行为。

申诉对我国知识产权保护的海关规定也提出了异议。对于侵犯知识产权的没收货物，我国海关首先考虑的是公益使用或者回购。如果“被没收的侵犯知识产权货物无法用于社会公益事业且知识产权权利人无收购意愿，海关可以在消除侵权特征后依法拍卖”。只有在侵权特征无法消除的情况下，侵权的货物才被销毁。美方认为，像拍卖这种使侵权货物进入商业渠道的做法，不符合《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》，试图寻求改变。

此外，申诉还与美国同时向WTO提起的另一关于我国出版物市场准入问题的申诉相呼应：认为待审查出版发行的作品，在我国缺乏著作权保护。《著作权法》明确：依法禁止出版、传播的作品，不受保护。但是，中国法院对符合《伯尔尼公约》的版权作品在实践中是予以保护的。不少未通过审查的作品，像电视剧《金枝欲孽》，在被侵犯著作权后，同样能够得到司法的救济。

WTO申诉的技术性强、程序明确。在美国提起申诉后，中美将首先启动WTO争端解决机制下的磋商程序，寻求在磋商期内找到解决问题的办法。如果在此期间，双方无法达成一致，申诉将由争端解决的专家组受理。据悉，中美双方将于6月初进行磋商。　

在美国贸易谈判代表办公室公布的“2006特别301报告”中，美国政府将知识产权问题诉诸WTO争端解决机制的意向已经显露。美方表示，此次申诉表明了双方贸易伙伴关系日渐成熟；而吴仪则警告，申诉违背了“两国领导人倡导的通过对话解决分歧的共识”，“将会造成极坏的负面影响”。　

此番美国在WTO提起申诉，而没有选择非正式磋商等渠道来解决分歧，反映了中美之间的知识产权摩擦不断升级。近年来，除了像上海襄阳路市场(已撤销)、北京秀水街、义乌批发市场等传统商业领域外，美方对知识产权保护的关注范围也逐渐扩张至虚拟领域——互联网。我国去年出台了《信息网络传播权保护条例》，但是，在互联网上如何保护著作权的争执却并未消失。事实上，美国唱片业巨头和国内互联网公司之间的诉讼日益激烈。美国出版业、电影和音乐业、制药业、软件业、通讯业等在华的不同利益追求，以及他们对美国政府政策取向的不同要求，也使得未来中美知识产权的纠纷更加复杂。　

中国政府如何在国内保护知识产权，这还只是问题的一个方面。最近几年，中国企业在开拓美国市场时，不断遭遇到知识产权的狙击，各种各样的“专利门”事件层出不穷。浙江通领集团、珠海炬力集团等都有过应对美国国际贸易委员会（ITC）337调查的经历。根据美国法律，如果ITC裁定专利侵权属实，那么涉案产品将不能进入美国市场。据悉，由于我国企业遭遇涉外知识产权纠纷的案件逐年增多，有关部委正着手建立企业知识产权海外维权的支持和协调机制。　

《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》已经为WTO成员制定了最低标准的知识产权保护规则，确立了全球知识产权保护的基本框架，但知识产权的全球化不会就此止步，比如说专利制度的全球化。虽然可以回旋的空间有限，但是，面对知识产权的“先行者”不断要求“后来者”提高知识产权保护水平的压力，确认我国的自身利益、认清谈判地位、化解矛盾、促进发展却是可行的。毕竟，如果“对话比对抗好，合作比施压好”的理念不能付诸现实，至少还可以按照规则，积极应对，“奉陪到底”。

Metro Technologies Co., Ltd. of Suzhou loses before ITC

2007-05-31T14:14:00.000+08:00

In the Matter of CERTAIN LASER BAR CODE SCANNERS AND SCAN ENGINES, COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

Final Disposition: Violation Found; Cease & Desist Order; Limited Exclusion Order.

Metro Technologies Co., Ltd. of Suzhou, China 码捷（苏州）科技有限公司 and Metrologic Instruments, Inc. of Blackwood, New Jersey have sixty days to appeal the Commission’s final determination to the Federal Circuit.

背景：论美国“337调查”程序及我国企业的应对措施

蒋志培：中国保护知识产权是真诚的

2007-05-30T11:06:00.000+08:00

“中国保护知识产权是真诚的。”

“他（指蒋志培）告诉记者，对知识产权的保护的确很大程度上是在发达国家压力和推动下进行的，这也符合融入全球经济化大潮的趋势，但我们对自己特殊的国情和走创新发展道路需要怎样的知识产权制度支撑，研究还不是很透彻。因此，中国亟待建立我们自己的有特色的知识产权保护机制。”

“在处理涉外侵权纠纷案件中，除了对专业性要求高，法官还往往受到两方面的压力。一方面，国内往往有某种片面情绪，要求保护国家利益、民族利益；另一方面，起诉者也往往以国外的标准和习惯要求保护他们在华的知识产权。法官如果掌握不好分寸，就会对法治造成破坏。”

我非常同意这些判断，而且，我也想起了由英国国际发展国务大臣Clare Short设立的英国知识产权委员会在2002年9月发布的一份“知识产权与发展政策相结合”的报告。该报告试图尽力考虑如下议题：“

1 how national IPR regimes could best be designed to benefit developing countries within the context of international agreements, including TRIPS;

2 how the international framework of rules and agreements might be improved and developed – for instance in the area of traditional knowledge – and the relationship between IPR rules and regimes covering access to genetic resources;

3 the broader policy framework needed to complement intellectual property regimes including for instance controlling anti-competitive practices through competition policy and law. ”

回答这些问题，需要可靠的证据，实证的研究，广泛的咨询，审慎的评估，而不是武断、盲从、轻率和冒进。今天，在中国，这方面有份量的工作，据我所知，还是很少。蒋志培法官的忧虑是否亦在于此？

互联网时代的著作权保护

2007-05-25T13:56:00.000+08:00

去年12月，我参加了由香港浸会大学媒体与传播研究中心与南京大学网络传播研究中心联合召集，香港浸会大学主办的“数码传播与社会转型：中华社会及其他地区之经验”的国际会议，并就被会议接纳的论文《搜索引擎提供的网络链接与信息网络传播权保护》做了发言。

5月23日，特地去旁听了中国互联网协会网络版权联盟（ISCU）主办的“网络经济下的版权纠纷”研讨会。

围绕着不久前11家国际知名唱片公司联合起诉“雅虎中文网”侵犯著作邻接权的案件，互联网公司和唱片公司的代表各执一词，针锋相对。蒋志培法官和高卢麟先生也先后做了评论。

回来后，看到了有关WEB RADIO的一系列报道：

Broadcasters Challenge Streaming Rules

Will new royalty rates kill online radio?

Feds Come to Web Radio Rescue

Music Industry Defers Web Royalties

如何平衡利益？我觉得，这是一个很好的案例，值得深究。

In-depth Discussion：What Goes Up Must Come Down: Copyright and Process in the Age of User-posted Content

打击盗版行动

2007-05-25T12:17:00.000+08:00

全国“扫黄打非”夏季战役打响重点做好5项工作

关于加强治理销售盗版及非法出版物游商地摊和无证照经营行为的通知

Gowers review of intellectual property from UK

2007-05-25T10:48:00.000+08:00

In December 2005, the Chancellor and the Secretaries of State for Trade and Industry, and Culture, Media and Sport asked Andrew Gowers to "establish whether the (IP) system was fit for purpose in an era of globalisation, digitisation and increasing economic specialisation."

Andrew Gowers' answer is a qualified 'yes' in the Review published on 6th December 2006.

"I do not think the system is in need of radical overhaul. However, taking a holistic view of the system, I believe there is scope for reform to serve better the interests of consumers and industry alike. There are three areas in which the Review concentrates its recommendations to improve the UK framework for innovation:

1 strengthening enforcement of IP rights, whether through clamping down on piracy or trade in counterfeit goods;
2 reducing costs of registering and litigating IP rights for businesses large and small; and
3 improving the balance and flexibility of IP rights to allow individuals, businesses and institutions to use content in ways consistent with the digital age."

The Review is convincing due to its "evidence-based approach" and supplemental analysis from external experts, including examination of "economic impact of changes to the length of copyright term on sound recordings, and the question of orphan works". "The Review also consulted widely with a range of stakeholders in industry, academia and the public sector."

Listed 54 recommendations in the Review are of insight, and some are also valuable to China.

The UK Intellectual Property Office (UK-IPO) has published a timetable for the implementation of the Gowers Review recommendation.

IPR again listed as key China-U.S. trade concern

2007-05-21T20:40:00.000+08:00

BAUCUS, COLLEAGUES CALL ON VICE PREMIER WU TO ADDRESS KEY U.S.-CHINA TRADE CONCERNS: Senators send letter in advance of Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade talks

In the letter, senators press Wu prepared to make meaningful commitments to "achieve significant, verifiable, and sustained reductions in piracy, counterfeiting, and other infringements of intellectual property rights (“IPR”), specifically ending the production of pirated optical discs and stepping up dramatically IPR enforcement at trade fairs" when she prepares for the JCCT meeting （中美商贸联委会）.

In a recent interview, House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee （众议院筹款委员会）Chairman Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat, expressed that, "China has treated international standards so unfairly, manipulated their currency, dumped goods on (our) markets ... (and) stole our patents and copyrights." The frustration reflects the depth of pride and prejudice among many members of Congress.

How will the Iron Lady of China handle her trip to Washington and resolve the difficult issue?

On the WTO IPR dispute brought by US against China last month, Wu warned, at China High-level Forum on Intellectual Property Rights Protection 2007, the US action "will have an utterly negative impact and will inevitably badly damage bilateral intellectual property cooperation." "The Chinese government is extremely dissatisfied about this, but we will proactively respond according to the related WTO rules and see it through to the end."

话外音：推进中美贸易互利共赢。

后续：中美海关签署加强知识产权执法合作备忘录。

吴仪：中国公众知识产权保护意识明显提高。

中美将就中国知识产权保护等问题进行磋商

2007-05-18T10:02:00.000+08:00

新华网快讯：商务部新闻发言人王新培１６日说，中国和美国将于６月５日至８日就中国知识产权保护和出版物市场准入问题进行双边磋商。

在4月28日，复旦大学知识产权研究中心与上海WTO事务咨询中心（信息部）等联合举行了“中美知识产权WTO磋商案专家研讨会” 。

然而，在看了China - Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights - Request for Consultations by the United States 以及相关的文件之后，使我感到困惑的是，研讨会的一些讨论似乎并没有完全针对此次美方提出的申诉，仍在各说各话。

背景：美国宣布就中国知识产权问题向WTO申诉

Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007 submitted to Congress

2007-05-17T14:14:00.000+08:00

Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007

The act is aimed to further enhance DoJ's ability to prosecute crimes concerning intellectual property rights.

To quote DoJ's press release,

"Among its many provisions, the Act includes measures that would:

1 Increase the maximum penalty for counterfeiting offenses from 10 years to 20 years imprisonment where the defendant knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury, and increase the maximum penalty to life imprisonment where the defendant knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause death;

2 Provide stronger penalties for repeat-offenders of the copyright laws;

3 Implement broad forfeiture reforms to ensure the ability to forfeit property derived from or used in the commission of criminal intellectual property offenses;

4 Strengthen restitution provisions for certain intellectual property crimes (e.g., criminal copyright and DMCA offenses);

5 Ensure that the exportation and transhipment of copyright-infringing goods is a crime, just as the exportation of counterfeit goods is now criminal."

Some experts often refer to US's legislation when defending our own intellectual property policy. Unfortunately, their reference is wrong sometimes, making their argument weak and vulnerable.

盗版：各自表述

2007-05-16T17:28:00.000+08:00

知识产权局：去年我国软件业盗版率降至24% v. 中国盗版软件使用率连续三年下降

其中的一些观点是很中肯的：

“解决棘手的盗版假冒问题会因所涉及产品类型的不同而有很大的差别。在中国，由于从事个人电脑生产的企业数量相对较少，政府在此领域采取的反盗版措施实施起来也就相对较为容易；相反，由于制售盗版电影光盘的公司作坊多如牛毛，问题解决起来就要难得多。”

“中国有一个发展国内软件产业的雄心勃勃的计划，政府已经意识到盗版问题会影响这一计划的实施。”

比较有意思的交锋：“FT中文网”前些时的“读者有话说”之“正版PK盗版”。

雷军：金山如何面对知识产权保护和盗版？

补记：5月25日的一则新闻，一位在eBay上出售盗版Symantec软件的个人将向SIIA支付20.5万美元，以便达成庭外和解。

Also from the Economist: Free loaders (May 30)

Landmark decision on obviousness from the Supreme Court of the U.S.

2007-05-16T13:58:00.000+08:00

At last, SCOTUS rejects rigid application of the TSM test, raises the bar for patent claims, and makes it easier to invalidate patents:

KSR INTERNATIONAL CO. v. TELEFLEX INC. ET AL.

What will the patent landscape be after the court's decision?

Let's wait and see.

The truth is?

2007-05-15T18:44:00.000+08:00

请看《现代资本主义的挑战：保护知识产权》。

我参加了2007“中国保护知识产权高层论坛”。分论坛之一——中国企业知识产权海外保护峰会上，炬力集团的董事长李湘伟讲述的，却是一个不同的故事。

双方各执一词，可以理解。是否侵权，美国国际贸易委员会（International Trade Commission）也已有裁决。

但是，输掉了国际贸易委员会的官司，就要被剥夺公司在美国资本市场融资的权利，这样的提议，恐怕是走得太远了。

知识产权司法保护将全面升级

2007-05-15T16:19:00.000+08:00

不久前写的，刊登在《新青年》2007年第4期。

过去20年中，随着我国经济的快速发展，知识产权保护问题日益突出。一方面，发达国家长期指责我国打击假冒、盗版和保护知识产权不力，高度依赖知识产权保护的海外创新企业对我国的知识产权保护也同样信心不足；另一方面，我国本土知识型产业逐渐成长，从“中国制造”转向“中国创造”的意识不断增强，加强知识产权保护已成为我国自身激励自主创新、维护公平竞争的迫切需要。

知识产权的司法保护，在我国知识产权执法保护体系中居于基础地位，发挥着主导作用。最近，最高人民法院公布了《关于全面加强知识产权审判工作为建设创新型国家提供司法保障的意见》（以下简称《意见》），这份被称为“当前和今后一个时期知识产权审判工作的纲领性文件”一出台，立即引起诸多关注。

创新不再是“找死”

“不创新等死，创新找死。”民间流行的这句话形象地反映出知识产权权利人的维权困境。民事侵权纠纷向来是我国知识产权纠纷的主体。但是，权利人往往面对许多现实的困难。首先是举证难。比如说要举证侵权人的侵权得利多少，在实践中往往受到很大限制，直接导致法律适用困难。此次《意见》明确提出要“适当减轻权利人的赔偿举证责任”，令长期备受困扰的权利人看到了希望。《意见》更提出“探索当事人举证指导制度；探索试行调查令制度”等，值得期待。

另一方面，即使权利人胜诉，要让判决得到切实执行也是困难重重。追本溯源，知识产权案件执行制度的不健全，以及地方保护和部门本位严重都是执行难的重要原因。《意见》不仅对健全知识产权案件执行制度做了具体要求，还特别指出要“抵制地方保护和部门本位”。

除此之外，权利人获得赔偿太低、维权成本太高的困境也得到了充分考虑。《意见》要求加大侵权赔偿和民事制裁力度，贯彻全面赔偿原则，同时辅以诉讼调解、诉讼指导和诉讼释明，以期切实降低维权成本。

可以预见的是，《意见》若能得到很好的贯彻和落实，在司法保护之下权利人心里就有了底，创新绝不会再是“找死”的行为。

全面完善产权保护

2001年，国家知识产权局授予美国辉瑞公司“万艾可”（俗称“伟哥”）发明专利权。三年后，专利复审委员会宣告“万艾可”专利无效。辉瑞不服，向法院提起了行政诉讼。去年，北京市一中院一审裁决专利复审委员会的决定“应予撤销”，辉瑞胜诉。

这场专利官司的影响很大。事实上，在行政审判方面，专利、商标等知识产权确权纠纷案件的司法复审，历来备受关注。对此《意见》申明，要“在事实认定和法律适用上对行政行为进行全面的合法性审查”，同时“加强对知识产权行政授权争议案件的审判监督”，并建立重大知识产权案件报告制度。《意见》还对监督和支持知识产权行政执法做了阐述。

知识产权诞生于商业竞争，知识产权保护与公平竞争之间如何取得平衡，一直是争论的热点。《意见》禁止知识产权权利滥用，要求“制止非法垄断技术、妨碍技术进步的行为”。技术合同无效事由认定，侵权警告和诉权滥用的防止，确认不侵权诉讼和滥诉反赔制度的完善等均有提及。这些与当前《专利法》、《反不正当竞争法》等的修改，《反垄断法》、《劳动合同法》等的制定形成呼应。

此外，《意见》还就完善知识产权民事案件管辖和受理制度、临时措施适用、专业技术事实认定、慎重认定驰名商标以及加强知识产权司法解释、健全知识产权审判组织、加强审判队伍职业化建设等诸多问题进行了阐述。

在《国家知识产权战略》即将出台之际，《意见》可以被认为是这一国家战略的前奏，令人鼓舞。但是，一个重要的事实是，我国已经具有高水平保护知识产权的法律制度，执法情况却倍受置疑。因此，要想在我国真正建立起“司法公正高效权威、权利人维权积极便捷、侵权人必受惩处、知识财富有序流转的良好的知识产权司法保护环境”，恐怕还需要扎扎实实地不懈努力。

制药业专利立法新动向

2007-05-15T15:40:00.000+08:00

文章是2006年夏写的，刊登在《新青年权衡》2006年第10期。

今年5月，辉瑞董事长兼首席执行官Henry　Mckinnell在《金融时报》撰文，批评印度现行法律对于制药业知识产权的保护乏力，呼吁印度进一步修订专利法。此时，在中国，《专利法》第三次修改的准备工作已近尾声。7月，中国国家知识产权局发布了《中华人民共和国专利法修订草案(征求意见稿)》。通读这份征求意见稿，可以看到，相当部分的拟修订条款恰恰和我国制药业的发展密切相关。

目前我国九成以上的化学药和生物药都是仿制的。仿制药的上市，需要通过严格的行政审批。为了获取通过行政审批所需的数据和信息，仿制药生产商常常会在专利药的专利保护期尚未届满之时，就对拟上市的药品进行研发、制备和临床试验等一系列实验活动。这些实验活动是否侵犯了专利药品的专利权？这份征求意见稿参考了美国的Hatch-Waxman法案，明确规定上述实验活动不视为侵犯专利权。这无疑为我国仿制药生产商在此问题上提供了一个法律避风港，可以在专利药的专利保护期限届满之后，更为迅速地推出仿制药。不过，美国的专利法对此问题还有一系列的补充规定，比如只能在专利药品的专利权届满之后才能提交行政审批申请。因此，如何协调好与药品行政审批的关系，征求意见稿还有待完善。

对于制药业而言，遗传资源具有重要意义。但是，目前普遍存在的一个问题是，利用了遗传资源的制药成果可以得到专利保护，而遗传资源提供者的权益却未能得到充分的体现。为此，征求意见稿增设了披露遗传资源来源的要求，这无疑将对未来的药品专利申请产生影响：一方面，如果专利申请依赖于遗传资源的获取和利用，那么应当披露其来源；另一方面，如果发明创造依赖于非法获取和利用的遗传资源，那么将不能被授予专利权。但是，对于是否需要提供遗传资源获取和利用时知情同意和惠益分享的证据，征求意见稿未作说明。值得注意的是，就在今年6月，由中国国家知识产权局和美国专利商标局共同召开的传统知识、遗传资源和民间文艺研讨会上，美方重申了反对为增设披露遗传资源来源而修改《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》的立场。

药品的进出口也是关系制药业发展的重要问题。在药品进口方面，征求意见稿明确允许平行进口。当专利药品在国外售出后，允许购买者将其进口到我国国内，而不视为侵犯专利权。在药品出口方面，规定可以强制许可制造和出口专利药品至其它国家，以解决其公共健康问题。虽然这为我国药品生产商制造和出口有关专利药品打开了通道，但是，专利强制许可问题复杂，往往附有大量限制性条件，征求意见稿对此显得语焉不详，只是“建议将这些限制性条件留待专利法实施细则或者部门规章予以详细规定”。

此外，征求意见稿进一步加强了对专利权人合法权益的行政保护和司法保护的力度，完善了更加有利于专利权人的侵权赔偿规定，还增加了规制专利权人懈怠行使专利权的条款等等。这些也都需要制药业加以注意。

专利是制药业的核心竞争力。如果这份征求意见稿未经修改而付诸施行，那么无疑将改变我国制药业专利保护的现状。因此，国内外药品生产商对于征求意见稿的反应，值得关注。至于征求意见稿本身在考虑我国老百姓对于药品价格的承受力，以及我国本土制药业现状的同时，能否激励如Henry Mckinnell先生所主张的制药业创新，从长远促进我国制药业实力的提升，这恐怕还需要时间去回答。