Image: Mohamed Mahmoud Hassan, Big Data Artificial Intelligence, Publicdomainpictures.net
On July 18, 2022, Dr. Mei Gechlik was interviewed by China Daily to discuss China’s intellectual property policy.Read more
Image: Pixels Hunter/Shutterstock.com
Amid foreign businesses’ growing concerns about COVID restrictions, China’s five-year intellectual property plan may help instill confidence. If implemented well, the plan will help China establish a strong intellectual property protection mechanism that will facilitate the country’s post-COVID economic recovery. How can the plan be implemented well?Read more
Image: Wright Studio/Lightspring/Shutterstock.com
Justice delayed is justice denied. The prompt delivery of judgments is particularly important in cases involving infringement of intellectual property rights, where holders of these rights need to minimize their losses by stopping the infringement swiftly. China does offer a solution. How does it work? Read more
Image: mohamed mahmoud hassan, Lightbulb, Idea, Innovation, Publicdomainpictures.net
How can the development of China’s Case Guidance System promote the country’s judicial protection of intellectual property rights, helping achieve the goals set forth in the Plan for the Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in People’s Courts (2021-2025)?Read more
Image: Anastasia Amstutz, Windshield Rain, Publicdomainpictures.net
In December 2019, the Supreme People’s Court of China released Guiding Case No. 115. Four months later, in April 2020, the second-instance judgment upon which this Guiding Case is based was selected by the Supreme People’s Court as one of the “Top 10 Intellectual Property Cases of Chinese Courts in 2019”. Why is this case so important? It is all related to the concepts of “act preservation” and “functional features” of inventions.Read more
Left image: Michal Sanca/Shutterstock.com
Middle image: Sazhnieva Oksana/Shutterstock.com
Right image: Artreef/Shutterstock.com
名人在中国应该怎么保护自己的名字？ 为什么阿里巴巴需要采取一些补救措施来避免当局进一步的监察？Read more
Left image: Michal Sanca/Shutterstock.com
Middle image: Sazhnieva Oksana/Shutterstock.com
Right image: Artreef/Shutterstock.com
What should celebrities do to protect their names in China? Why does Alibaba need to take some remedial measures to avoid further scrutiny from authorities?Read more
Image: Den Rise/Shutterstock.com
Apart from China’s Guiding Cases, legal practitioners, business executives, and other stakeholders must not forget about Typical Cases, another category of representative cases that the Supreme People’s Court of China can release to guide Chinese courts’ adjudication. What are Typical Cases? Why are they significant?Read more
Image: Heru Purwanto, Pomelo On The Tree, Publicdomainpictures.net
Guiding Case No. 160 addresses a fundamental issue: when rights to a new plant variety are granted, what falls within the scope of protection? According to China’s legislation, propagation materials of the plant for which variety rights have been granted are clearly protected. Yet, what are “propagation materials”? Unfortunately, no definition can be found in China’s legislation. Guiding Case No. 160 fills the legal gap by setting the criteria for such determination.Read more
Image: George Hodan, Agriculture, Publicdomainpictures.net
中国最高人民法院发布指导案例92号、100号和160号，明确该国立法和司法解释尚未解决的植物新品种权保护的基本问题。然而，本文分析指出，这三个指导性案例的指导原则已经被纳入最高人民法院最新的植物新品种司法解释。考虑到这一点，这些指导性案例是否基本上已经失去了重要性？熊美英博士解释了为什么答案是否定的并讨论了相关的含义。Read more
Image: George Hodan, Agriculture, Publicdomainpictures.net
The Supreme People’s Court of China released Guiding Case Nos. 92, 100, and 160 to clarify fundamental issues related to the protection of rights to new plant varieties that were left unanswered by the country’s legislation and judicial interpretations. Yet, have these three Guiding Cases essentially lost their significance, considering that their guiding principles, as analyzed in this article, have already been incorporated into the Supreme People’s Court’s latest judicial interpretation related to new plant varieties? Dr. Mei Gechlik explains why the answer is negative and discusses related implications. Read more
Image: Lilla Frerichs, Indian Corn 1, Publicdomainpictures.net
Before the release of Guiding Case No. 100, the Supreme People’s Court of China released Guiding Case No. 92 to establish this principle: in a case involving infringement of rights to a new plant variety, when the related DNA fingerprinting test result cannot provide a clear answer, 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. Guiding Case No. 100 shows what the defendant can do to meet this burden of proof.Read more
The material presented on this website is for general reference only.
SINOTALKS® LLC disclaims all liability for any inaccuracy, error, or incompleteness in such material.
本网站提供的材料仅供一般参考。
丝络谈有限公司不对此类材料中的任何不准确、错误或不完整内容承担任何责任。
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
© 2024 SINOTALKS® LLC | © 2024年 丝络谈有限公司
