How accurate was a Feb. 20, 2023 article of the Wall Street Journal that reports on a new development in China’s efforts to nab Western technology? I discuss what the available data says and refute the notion that this development is new. It nonetheless remains concerning.
China’s new patent linkage regime involves parallel civil and administrative enforcement mechanisms. Innovative pharmaceutical companies should prepare for the possibility of generic challengers and determine which mechanism will best suit their purposes. Biologics are not protected under this new regime.
On June 1, 2021, both the revised Copyright Law and Patent Law will come into effect. On May 24, 2021, CNIPA published its “Interim Measures on Disposition of Examination-Related Activities Post Patent Law Implementation” (CNIPA Notice Number 423)《关于施行修改后专利法的相关审查业务处理暂行办法》的公告（第423号）(“Interim Measures”). The Interim Measures address the needs of the patent office of CNIPA to address concrete examination issues in the absence of higher-ranking implementing regulations. Why has China been so slow to pass implementing regulations for its new IPR-related laws? What is the significance of the delay in drafting and implementing these regulations?
Here is a listing of recordings of some recent programs that are now available as well as a listing of upcoming events. The Third Berkeley-Tsinghua Conference on Transnational IP Litigation was held […]
On January 14, 2021, IPO submitted comments to the China National Intellectual Property Administration on its Recommendations for Amendments to the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law (Draft for Comment) 《专利法实施细则修改建议（征求意见稿）》 IPO’s comments included suggestions […]
IPO’s Comments on recently proposed examination guidelines and on the SPC’s patent linkage reveal an increasingly complex web of IP legislation which is dependent on clarity in higher level laws.
RCEP and the Phase 1 Trade Agremeent are strange historical bedfellows, joined by common approaches to IP that diminish its role as a private right. The differences between the two agreements are also significant. The Phase 1 Agreement explicitly contemplated a Phase 2 Trade Agreement. It also only involved one country. RCEP intends to be comprehensive and regional, if not global. It is an alternative to the TPP. It will help China establish global IP norms.
The Berkeley Center for Law and Technology will be launching a five-part webinar series on “Innovation, Regulation in the Life Sciences” on November 17 from 4:30-6:00 PM. The launch program is devoted to “China’s Emerging Regime for IP In the Life Sciences”.
According to Chinese press reports, the National People’s Congress Standing Committee decided to approve the revised patent law on October 17, 2020. The Legal Daily notes that among the key provisions that […]
Thanks to He Jing of the Anjie Law Firm, attached please find an unofficial line-by-line translation of the recently released Patent Law Amendments 2nd reading. Comments are due August 16, 2020. Some highlights […]
Mark Allen Cohen (柯恒} is a Distinguished Senior Fellow, Director and Lecturer of the Asia IP Project at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology at the University of California, Berkeley. In total, he has nearly 40 years of private sector, public sector, etc., in-house and academic experience on IPR issues in China, including numerous publications and awards. This is his private blog.
China IPR - Intellectual Property Developments in China 