On July 16, the Supreme Peoples Court published a public comment draft of proposed revisions to its “Decision of the SPC Regarding Questions of Application of Law in Adjudication of Patent Cases”, 最高人民法院关于审理专利纠纷案件适用法律问题的若干规定. Comments are due by August 15, 2014. Comments may be emailed to: zhuanliyijian@163.com。 The last revision to this document was in 2013, when a provision was inserted to give jurisdiction to designated basic courts to handle patent cases.
Of particular note in this short set of revisions are provisions regarding providing an appraisal report for utility model patents to the court if such a report had been requested by the plaintiff of SIPO, as well as provisions which appear to provide more flexibility in calculation of damages by the court, consistent with the 2008 patent law.
Many of the changes appear self-explanatory – such as those which track changes in relevant statutory provisions. However, in light of the efforts to amend the patent law, experiments in specialized IP courts, calls for more deterrent damages and more extensive commercialization of IP rights, some additional explanation would be helpful regarding the reasons for any changes in policy that may be implicit in these revisions and any further changes that may be contemplated.
Earlier USG comments on the patent law revisions are found here.
Once I receive a full translation or comparison of prior drafts from any reader, I will post it on line. Readers are encouraged to send in their translations, suggestions and comments. For now, the full Chinese text of the proposed revisions with my own initial bilingual observations are attached.
China IPR - Intellectual Property Developments in China 
I have written several times in my blogposts that the Supreme People’s Court should more consistently release drafts for public comment. I am glad to see a draft released for public comment for in this instance and look forward to seeing evidence of a new trend.
LikeLike
Paragraph 30 of Feb. 4, 2004 meeting of the TRIPS Council at the WTO, Chinese response to US inquiry: “As a major arm in IP
enforcement, the judiciary departments in China were also subjected to the principle of transparency, which was evidenced by the public soliciting of comments for judicial interpretations. The Supreme People’s Court would further broaden the scope of commenting in the course of interpretation. ” Perhaps the IP tribunal had been ahead of other tribunals in soliciting comments?
LikeLike