News & Cases from China: October 2021

Published on 01 Dec 2021 | 5 minute read

CNIPA has issued draft Administrative Measures for the Establishment of Permanent Representative Offices of Foreign Patent Agencies in China (for public comment)

26-10-2021

CNIPA, the Chinese National Intellectual Property Administration, has issued draft Administrative Measures for the Establishment of Resident Representative Offices of Foreign Patent Agencies in China, for public comment, setting out the requirements that must be met.  These include the following:

(1) the Agency must be legally established abroad;

(2) the Agency must have been in the patent agency business for more than five years, and not breached any relevant law or regulation;

(3) the chief representative of the resident office shall have full capacity for civil conduct and a patent agent qualification.  He shall have practiced as a patent agent for no less than two years, and not breached any relevant law or regulation, or any criminal law; and 

(4) the Agency must have more than 10 patent attorneys practicing in its own country.

国家知识产权局就《外国专利代理机构在华设立常驻代表机构管理办法(征求意见稿)》公开征求意见

发文日期:2021-10-26

为了规范外国专利代理机构在华常驻代表机构的设立及其业务活动,保障外国专利代理机构在华常驻代表机构及其代表的合法权益,优化营商环境,促进专利代理行业健康发展,国家知识产权局制定了《外国专利代理机构在华设立常驻代表机构管理办法(征求意见稿)》(《管理办法》),并向社会公开征求意见。

根据《管理办法》,外国专利代理机构申请在华设立常驻代表机构,应当具备下列条件:

(一)在国外合法成立;

(二)实质性开展专利代理业务5年以上,并且没有因执业行为受过自律惩戒或者行政处罚;

(三)代表机构的首席代表根据中国法律规定具备完全民事行为能力,具有专利代理资格,专利代理执业不少于2年,没有因执业行为受过自律惩戒或者行政处罚,没有因故意犯罪受过刑事处罚; 

(四) 在其本国有10名以上专利代理师执业。

来源:国知局   2021-10-26

链接:www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2021/10/26/art_75_170997.html

 

CNIPA Replies to Local IP Administration on Criteria for determining "Intentional Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights"

2021-10-18

The Heilongjiang Intellectual Property Administration sought guidance from the CNIPA in relation to the criteria for determining "Intentional Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights”. The main contents of CNIPA’s response are as follows:

  1. The criteria for "Intentional Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights"

The provisions in Intellectual Property legislation introducing punitive, or aggravated, damages refer to “intentional” infringement, which involves a subjective element.  They also refer to "aggravating circumstances", which generally concerns the means by which the infringement was carried out and the consequences of the infringement, and does not involve an evaluation of the state of mind of the infringer. In determining "intentional infringement of intellectual property rights", attention should be paid to distinguishing "intentional infringement" and "aggravating circumstances” and avoiding inappropriate overlapping of the two elements.

  1. Whether entities that have intentionally infringed intellectual property rights should be included in the list of “Untrustworthy Entities which have engaged in Seriously Illegal and Dishonest Acts”

The Administrative Measure of the State Administration for Market Regulation that establishes this List (the Measure) clearly states, in Article 9, that entities which commit intentional infringement of intellectual property rights and other illegal acts that amount to unfair competition and disrupt the market, shall be included in the list of entities that have engaged in seriously illegal and dishonest acts, provided they have been subject to a heavier administrative penalty.

国知局批复“故意侵犯知识产权”认定标准

发文日期:2021-10-18

国知局批复了《黑龙江省知识产权局关于“故意侵犯知识产权”标准认定有关事宜的请示》,主要内容如下:

一、关于“故意侵犯知识产权”行为的认定标准

在知识产权惩罚性赔偿规定中,“故意”是知识产权惩罚性赔偿条款适用的主观要件,惩罚性赔偿作为对侵权人的加重处罚,对侵权行为的主观过错程度要求更高。“情节严重”是惩罚性赔偿条款的另一构成要件,主要是针对行为人实施侵权行为的手段方式及其造成的后果等客观方面作出的评价,一般不直接涉及对行为人主观状态的判断。因此,在细化“故意侵犯知识产权”认定标准时,应注意依法加强知识产权保护,把“故意”和“情节严重”进行科学区分,避免对两个构成要件进行不适当的交叉或者重复评价。

二、关于“故意侵犯知识产权”行为是否列入严重违法失信名单的判断

来源:国知局   2021-10-18

链接: https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2021/10/18/art_2073_170846.html

 

Unfair Competition Action between Food Delivery Giants - Meituan ordered to pay Ele.me 1 million Yuan (approx. US$156.000) Compensation

2021-10-14

Meituan’s “choose one from two” policy is, essentially, an exclusivity arrangement, imposing restrictions on users that also offer take out delivery on other platforms.  If it finds that a merchant on its platform is offering services on another platform, it reduces the merchant’s exposure in customer search results and imposes certain penalties. Ele.me considered that Meituan’s behavior was limiting consumers’ choices, harming their interests, and causing substantial damage to Eleme’s operations. It brought an unfair competition action in the Qingdao Intermediate People's Court, seeking orders that the Defendant immediately stop its unfair competition and compensate the Plaintiff for loss and reasonable costs totalling 5 million yuan (approx. US$782,000).

The Court found that Ele.me and Meituan were both operating similar food delivery platforms. The Plaintiff was, therefore, in a direct competitive relationship with the Defendant.  Meituan has a dominant position in China’s food delivery industry, with a market share well over 50%; it took advantage of its dominant position to impose restrictions on merchants offering services on another site.  That had an adverse effect on both the merchants’ activities and Ele.me’s business. Moreover, it infringed the consumers' right to know, and freely choose, the service they were getting. The Defendant’s actions harmed the rights and interests of the Plaintiff, the merchants, and the consumers, and sabotaged the fair market.  It violated the provisions of Article 12, paragraph 2 (4) of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, and, therefore, constituted unfair competition.

The Court ordered Meituan to compensate Ele.me for economic loss and reasonable costs totaling 1 million yuan (approx. US$156,000). Both parties stated that they would not appeal, and Meituan said it would comply with the court judgment. 

饿了么诉美团不正当竞争获赔100万元

日期:2021-10-14

美团对其平台下的商家实施“二选一”的行为,如果发现其平台下的商家又入驻其他平台,就会通过对该商家实施搜索降权,回收商家的优惠活动,降低曝光度,强制其参加优惠活动等行为来强迫商家使用美团的独家服务。饿了么认为,美团对其商家实施二选一的行为减少了消费者的选择,损害了消费者的利益,给饿了么的经营造成了实质性的损害,于是将其诉至山东省青岛市中级人民法院,请求判令被告立即停止不正当竞争行为,连带赔偿原告因被告的不正当竞争行为导致的损失及原告为制止被告不正当竞争行为而支付的合理费用共计500万元。

法院经审理认为,“饿了么”平台与“美团外卖”平台的相关市场均为互联网餐饮外卖服务平台,为平台内经营者与消费者提供一种信息匹配业务,因此原告作为“饿了么”平台的经营者与经营“美团外卖”平台的被告具有直接竞争关系。而被告利用其市场支配地位对跨平台商家采取的搜索降权,任意改变配送范围、强制其参加优惠活动等行为,影响其商户正常入驻“饿了么”平台经营以及造成“饿了么”平台商户的流失,妨碍原告的正常经营,削弱原告的盈利能力,对原告的竞争利益造成损害。且造成平台商户的流失还会损害消费者的选择权和知情权。因此,被告的行为损害了原告、商户及消费者的合法权益,扰乱了市场竞争秩序,违反了反不正当竞争法第十二条第二款第(四)项的规定,构成不正当竞争。

法院最终判令美团赔偿饿了么经济损失及合理开支100万元,双方均表示不会上诉,美团表示将主动履行判决。

来源:中国法院网 

链接:https://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2021/10/id/6311623.shtml

 

Eight People Imprisoned for Infringement of Movie Copyrights

2021-10-25

A group of eight people, including Chen, Lin, and Lai, operated various film websites such as  "Fastest Resource Network", downloading without authority and distributing a large number of films and television works, including "Wandering Earth" and other popular films that were aired during the Chinese Spring Festival. Foreign gambling advertisements were also displayed on the websites, generating profits as high as 12.5 million yuan (approx. US$2,500,000).

In a first instance judgment, the Shanghai Third Intermediate Court found the eight defendants guilty of the crime of copyright infringement. The principal offender, Chen, was sentenced to four years and six months’ imprisonment and fined RMB 550,000 (approx. US$85,000). The other defendants were sentenced to terms of imprisonment ranging from ten months to two years and ten months.

8人因侵犯《流浪地球》等著作权获刑

日期: 2021-10-25

陈某、林某、赖某等人经营管理“最快资源网”等多个非法网站,共同下载、传播大量盗版影视作品,其中包括《流浪地球》等春节档热映电影,同时在视频链接中添加境外赌博广告以牟利,非法经营数额高达1250万余元。

综合各被告人犯罪的事实、性质、情节及对社会的危害程度,上海三中院最终当庭对涉案的8名被告人以侵犯著作权罪作出一审判决。其中,主犯陈某被判处有期徒刑四年六个月,并处罚金人民币五十五万,其他被告人分别被判处有期徒刑二年十个月到有期徒刑十个月不等刑法,并处以相应罚金。

来源:湖北省版权保护中心   2021-10-25

链接:http://www.ccct.net.cn/html/bqzx/2021/1025/3147.html

30% Complete
Rouse Editor
Editor
+44 20 7536 4100
Rouse Editor
Editor
+44 20 7536 4100