In Brief

On:
In: SINOTALKS® In Brief | 丝络谈™简讯

Image: 13_Phunkod/Shutterstock.com

在推出丝络谈™（SINOTALKS.COM）仅几天后，熊美英博士便开始出版名为丝络谈™ 简讯（SINOTALKS.COM In Brief）的双周通讯。此通讯的目标是阐明中国法律和政策，以便读者能够针对与中国相关的问题制定循证策略。Read more

In Brief

On:
In: SINOTALKS® In Brief | 丝络谈™简讯

Image: 13_Phunkod/Shutterstock.com

Only a few days after the launch of SINOTALKS.COM, Dr. Mei Gechlik began publishing a biweekly newsletter titled SINOTALKS.COM In Brief. The goal for this newsletter is to demystify Chinese law and policy so that readers will be able to craft evidence-based strategies for their China-related issues.Read more

Guiding Case 92

On:
In: SinoRules&Cases™ | 丝络规则与案例™

Image: Andrew Schmidt, Corn On The Cob, Publicdomainpictures.net

指导案例92号对侵害植物新品种权案件中经常遇到的一个重要问题提供指导：当相关的DNA指纹检测结果无法提供明确的答案，如何确定两植物是否属于同一品种？根据此指导性案例，发生这种情况时，被诉侵权人（即被告）有责任证明被诉侵权植物与授予品种权的植物不同。法院如何决定将责任转移至被告是合理的？Read more

Guiding Case 92

On:
In: SinoRules&Cases™ | 丝络规则与案例™

Image: Andrew Schmidt, Corn On The Cob, Publicdomainpictures.net

Guiding Case No. 92 provides guidance on an important issue frequently encountered in cases involving infringement of rights to new plant varieties: how to determine whether two plants are of the same variety, when the related DNA fingerprinting test result cannot provide a clear answer.  According to this Guiding Case, when this happens, the allegedly infringing party, i.e., the defendant, has the burden to prove that the allegedly infringing plant is different from the plant for which variety rights have been granted.  How did the court justify the shifting of the burden to the defendant?Read more