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.
Several useful empirical reports on China’s IP environment have been released in the past few weeks. I summarize four of them: Trademark Litigation Jerry Xia and his colleagues at the Anjie firm […]
How much will the IP Sections of the Phase 1 Agreement (the “Agreement”) with China change IP strategies in China? For the most part, the Agreement adds much less than its appearance might […]
Stanford Law School has just released eight new guiding cases, including including five IP and unfair competition cases covering trademarks, unfair competition, and software copyright. The cases were determined to be guiding cases earlier this […]
夜来风雨声， 花落知多少? (At night the sound of wind and rain; Who knows how many flowers have fallen?; Poet Meng Haoran, 689-740, “Spring Dawn”) It is almost April, which means it is not […]
On Friday November 7 I attended and spoke at the US-China IP Summit at Loyola (https://chinaipr.com/2014/09/07/loyola-los-angeles-hosts-us-china-ip-summit-november-7/). Here are some highlights: Prof. David Nimmer (UCLA) talked about whether there is a need to reintroduce […]
The US and China recently concluded their Sixth Strategic and Economic Dialogue. IP-related outcomes involved such areas as: trade secret protection; cooperation with China’s judiciary; and software procurement. In addition there were […]
The Chinese media, including China Radio International, broke the news on October 8 that the website of China’s State Intellectual Property Office (www.sipo.gov.cn) was hosting training materials which appeared to have been […]