State Council Information Office Press Conference on Progress of Intellectual Property Rights Work in 2024
Date: 15 January 2025
The State Council Information Office indicated in a recent press conference that in 2024 China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) had met all its annual targets. The key data are as follows:
Source: Website of the State Council Information Office
News link: https://www.gov.cn/lianbo/fabu/202501/content_6998991.htm
国新办就2024年知识产权工作进展情况举办发布会
日期：2025-01-15
2024年国知局顺利完成全年各项目标，主要数据如下：
资料来源：国务院新闻办网站 2025-01-15
新闻链接：https://www.gov.cn/lianbo/fabu/202501/content_6998991.htm
Changsha Kaifu Court Adjudicates First Case of AI-Generated Pirated Audiovisual Links and Issues Judicial Recommendation on AI-Related Intellectual Property Rights
Date: 2 January 2025
In a pioneering case, a Beijing-based information technology company (‘the IT company’), which held the dissemination rights for a specific television drama over information networks, filed a lawsuit against a Beijing-based technology company (‘the AI company’), the developer and operator of an AI product. The IT company discovered that when users entered prompts such as "I want to watch a certain film or TV drama" into the AI product, the product would filter and prioritize links pointing to pirated resource websites. Consequently, the IT company accused the AI company of infringing its right to disseminate information over networks and filed a lawsuit in the Kaifu District Court of Changsha City.
The Court issued a judicial recommendation to the AI company, requiring it to actively build an intellectual property protection and risk prevention system for generative AI across various aspects, covering data input, content output, and product operation. The Court also mandated the establishment of an effective complaint and reporting mechanism for intellectual property issues to promote the healthy and standardized application of generative AI. The AI company has responded to the judicial recommendation and implemented corrective measures. The case was ultimately concluded with the Plaintiff's withdrawal of the lawsuit.
This case is the first to deal with the provision of links to pirated audiovisual works via AI products in China. It has been selected as one of the top ten typical cases of optimizing the business environment under the rule of law in Hunan courts in 2024. The Kaifu Court's issuance of the first national judicial recommendation on AI-related intellectual property rights, and the receipt of a satisfactory response by a leading Internet company has significant exemplary value in the context of advancing industry governance in the field of artificial intelligence.
Source: The Rule of Law Daily
News link: https://news.qq.com/rain/a/20250102A09A5200
长沙开福法院审理全国首例利用人工智能产品提供盗版影视作品链接案件，并发出全国首例涉“AI”知识产权司法建议书
日期：2025-01-02
本案中，北京某信息技术有限公司（以下简称“某信息技术公司”）为某影视剧的信息网络传播权所有人，北京某科技有限公司（以下简称“某科技公司”）为某款人工智能产品开发、运营主体。某信息技术公司发现，当用户在该人工智能产品中输入“我要看某影视剧”等提示词时，产品会筛选并优先展示多条指向盗版资源网站的链接。因此，某信息技术公司以某科技公司侵犯信息网络传播权为由，向长沙市开福区法院提起诉讼。
长沙市开福区法院向某科技公司发出司法建议书，要求企业在开发和运营生成式人工智能产品时，有针对性在数据输入端、内容输出端以及产品运营等各个环节，积极构建针对生成式人工智能的知识产权保护与风险防范体系，并建立健全针对知识产权问题的有效投诉与举报机制，促进生成式人工智能健康发展和规范应用。某科技公司收到司法建议书后，已经予以复函整改。案件最终以撤诉结案。
该案系全国首例利用人工智能产品提供盗版影视作品链接的案件，近日入选湖南法院2024年度优化法治化营商环境十大典型案例。开福法院向互联网头部企业发出全国首份涉“AI”知识产权司法建议书并获答复，对于推进人工智能领域行业治理具有重要示范意义。
资料来源：法治日报 2025-01-02
新闻链接：https://news.qq.com/rain/a/20250102A09A5200
CATL Sues CALB for Infringement of Patent relation to Battery Modules and Covers, Claiming RMB 60 Million and RMB 90 Million Respectively
Date: 17 January 2025
On 17 January, CALB Group Co., Ltd. (‘CALB’) announced on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange that it had recently been served with a civil complaint and related litigation materials filed with the Intermediate People's Court of Quanzhou City, Fujian Province. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff, Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited (‘CATL’) is claiming intellectual property rights infringement against CALB and other defendants regarding the utility model patent ZL201621122034.9 for battery modules. CATL is demanding that CALB cease the infringement and pay compensation for economic loss of RMB 60 million (approx. US$ 8.7 million) and reasonable expenses of RMB 1 million (approx. USD$145,000). Earlier this year, CATL had already filed an infringement lawsuit with the Intermediate People's Court of Hangzhou against CALB for the infringement of patent ZL202210514746.9, which related to the top cover assembly and secondary battery invention , claiming a total of RMB 91 million (approx. US$ 13.2 million). Neither of the two cases has been tried in court. CALB stated in the announcement that it has not infringed any patents and that it has filed invalidation requests in relation to the two patents in question with the National Intellectual Property Administration.
Both CATL and CALB are leading domestic power battery companies, and their patent disputes have a long history. Since 2021, CATL has initiated eight lawsuits against CALB, with claims exceeding RMB 900 million (approx. US$ 130.6 million), involving battery structural design, manufacturing processes, and other aspects. The Supreme People's Court has already concluded two patent lawsuits involving positive electrode sheets and lithium-ion batteries. CATL lost both cases as a result of invalidation of the underlying patents. In other patent infringement cases involving current collector components and batteries, explosion-proof devices, and power battery packaging components, the infringement have been found by first instance courts, but CALB is appealing those decisions. In October 2024, CALB launched a counterattack for the first time, suing CATL and its related companies for infringement of four of their lithium battery patents, with a total claim amount of RMB 1.07 billion (approx. US$ 154.7 million).
Source: CALB
News links: https://invest.calb-tech.com/upload/file/20250120/20250120103442.pdf
https://invest.calb-tech.com/upload/file/20250103/20250103203339.pdf
https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/relnews/cn/2025-01-24/doc-inehaaty7214552.shtml
宁德时代再诉中创新航电池模组和电池顶盖专利侵权，分别索赔6000万和9000万元
日期：2025-01-17
1月17日，中创新航在港交所公告，公司于近日收到福建省泉州市中级人民法院送达的民事起诉书等相关诉讼材料。根据起诉书，原告宁德时代针对公司及其他被告，就电池模组ZL201621122034.9号实用新型专利提出知识产权侵权索赔，要求中创新航停止侵权，索赔经济损失6000万人民币和合理支出100万人民币。今年早些时候，宁德时代已就二次电池的顶盖组件和二次电池 ZL202210514746.9号发明专利向杭州市中级人民法院提起侵权诉讼，索赔共计9100万人民币。此次提起的两起案件均未开庭审理，中创新航在公告中表示公司不存在侵权行为，已向国知局提起两项涉案专利的无效宣告请求。
宁德时代和中创新航均为国内动力电池巨头企业，但两家的专利纷争由来已久，自2021年开始，宁德时代已先后向中创新航发起8次诉讼，索赔额度超过9亿元，涉电池结构设计、制造工艺等。目前最高法已审结涉正极极片剂电池和锂电子电池的两项专利诉讼，由于基础专利遭到无效，宁德时代均败诉。涉集流构件和电池、防爆装置和动力电池封装组件的专利侵权案件，一审法院均判决侵权成立，但中创新航仍在上诉。2024年10月，中创新航首度发起正面反击，起诉宁德时代及其关联企业侵犯公司4项锂电池专利权索赔金额合计10.7亿元。
资料来源：中创新航 2025-01-17
CNIPA and Other Departments Issue and Revise Documents to Improve Intellectual Property Administration
Date: 2 January 2025
The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) and other relevant departments have issued and revised a series of documents, including the Administrative Review Procedures of the CNIPA, the Regulations on the Administrative Adjudication and Mediation of Patent Disputes, and the Regulations on Evidence in Trademark Administrative Law Enforcement, to improve the administrative management of intellectual property rights.
The newly revised Administrative Review Procedures of the CNIPA further expand the scope of cases accepted, adding the right to review actions related to trademark registration applications, protection of geographical indications, and government information disclosure. It also explicitly includes three types of cases, “administrative inaction,” “on-the-spot administrative penalties,” and “non-disclosure of government information” , within the scope of mandatory pre-review. This means that for these cases, administrative review must be sought before litigation can proceed. In addition, certain procedures have been refined: patent and trademark agents are permtted to participate in administrative reviews and the “separation of complex and simple cases” in the adjudication model has been strengthened by clarifying the conditions for applying ordinary and simplified procedures.
The newly promulgated Regulations on the Administrative Adjudication and Mediation of Patent Disputes will come into effect on 1 February 2025. These regulations refine the jurisdiction and escalated handling of patent infringement disputes. They also balance and safeguard the rights of the parties through improvements in the recusal system, compression of procedural time limits, standardization of infringement determination and evidence rules, strengthening of decision enforcement and transparency, and enhancement of information sharing in administrative adjudication.
The Regulations on Evidence in Trademark Administrative Law Enforcement consist of 24 articles and apply to the collection, review, and determination of evidence by departments responsible for trademark administrative law enforcement during the investigation of trademark violations. The regulations specify the types of evidence admissable in trademark administrative law enforcement, including documentary evidence, physical evidence, audio-visual materials, electronic data, electronic data records, witness statements, statements of the parties, expert opinions, on-site records, and evidence from outside the territory. Specific requirements for obtaining each type of evidence are clarified. The regulations also address the direct recognition of facts, the adoption of evidence from other departments, the effect of evidence acknowledged by one party, the probative force under different circumstances, the review of identification opinions, and the handling of contradictions in the parties' statements.
Source: CNIPA
https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2024/12/31/art_74_196991.html
https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2024/12/31/art_66_196990.html
https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2024/12/30/art_99_196969.html
国知局及其他部门出台、修订《国家知识产权局行政复议规程》《专利纠纷行政裁决和调解办法》《商标行政执法证据规定》等文件，完善知识产权行政管理
日期：2025-01-02
新修订的《国家知识产权局行政复议规程》进一步扩大受案范围，新增对商标注册申请、地理标志产品保护、政府信息公开等行为的复议权，并明确将“行政不作为”“当场行政处罚”“政府信息不公开”三类案件纳入复议前置范围（即必须先复议后诉讼）。此外还细化了复议程序和规制，如允许专利商标代理人参加行政复议、强化“繁简分流”审理模式，明确普通程序和简易程序适用条件等。
新出台的《专利纠纷行政裁决和调解办法》于2月1日起正式实施，主要对专利侵权纠纷的管辖权和提级处理进行了细化，同时从回避制度完善、程序时限压缩、规范侵权认定及证据规则、强化裁决执行与公开透明、加强行政裁决信息化数据共享等方面平衡、保障当事人权益。
《商标行政执法证据规定》全文共24条，适用于负责商标行政执法的部门在查处商标违法案件过程中的证据收集、审查和认定。规定明确了商标行政执法的证据种类，主要包括：书证、物证、视听资料、电子数据、电子数据笔录、证人证言、当事人的陈述、鉴定意见、现场笔录以及域外证据等。针对每种证据明确了取证要求。明确可直接认定的事实、其他部门证据的采纳、一方认可的证据效力、不同情形的证明力、辨认意见的审查、当事人的陈述前后矛盾的处理等内容。
资料来源：国家知识产权局 2025-01-02
https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2024/12/31/art_74_196991.html