This blog reviews Zhao Ye’s report on trade secret adjudication by the SPC IP Tribunal. Based on 11 published cases from 2025, the report highlights a sharp increase in damages, systematic reversal of lower court decisions, expanded use of burden-shifting, and stronger sanctions for evidence spoliation. In my view, these decisions also function as a form of strategic signaling, indicating a more rights-protective orientation in judicial practice. However, they do not yet constitute binding, system-wide legal change, which would require further judicial interpretations or formal designation as guiding cases. The emerging judicial trends may make Chinese civil courts a more viable forum for trade secret enforcement.
Regifting, Signaling, and Implementation: Comparing China’s IP Commitments Across the 2026 NTE, Phase One, and the 2016 JCCT
The recently released 2026 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (March 31, 2026) (the “NTE”) provides a useful opportunity to reassess U.S.–China intellectual property negotiations, particularly the Phase One Trade […]
White & Case 18th Annual Taiwan Roundtable
I will speak at the 18th Annual White & Case Taiwan Roundtable next Friday, Sept 22 in Taipei. The toipcs that I will discuss include: the developing relationship between sanctions and intellectual […]
Forthcoming Lecture on “IP in the Trump and Biden Trade Wars”
I will be in Taipei next week, where I will be delivering several public lectures. The first one will be on September 19, 2023 at the National Taiwan University of Sciences and […]
Forthcoming Book Talk on the Past and Future of Chinese IP
Berkeley Law will be hosting a book talk on the treatise, Intellectual Property Law in China (2d ed.) on September 23, 2021 at 5 PM Pacific Time. Registration is free. We will discuss the rapid evolution of China’s IP regime over the past 40 years as well as the likely directions that China’s IP regime will take place in the years ahead.
Bureaucracy and Politics in Recent SAMR Legislation
There are numerous heirarchies to Chinese legislation and IP laws are certainly not an except to this. Due to the government reorganization in 2018, Chinese efforts to become an innovative economy, and external political pressure from the Trade War, there has also been extensive external political pressure on Chinese IP legislative efforts. The different approaches to legislating may indicate potential weaknesses in the laws. They may also be the outcome of internal bureaucratic struggles.
The NTE Report On Chinese IP And Its Relationships To Chinese Legal Developments
USTR’s recently released NTE report shows continuing lack of clarity over key Chinese legal terms. The report also declines to discuss commercial rule of law issues raised in last years Special 301 report. What role does commercial rule of law have in the Biden Administration’s trade diplomacy? The answer is unclear.
Recent Recordings and Upcoming Programs
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 […]
The WTO IP Cases That Weren’t
Does the WTO / TRIPS Agreement still have teeth on IP? This blog explores the possible claims that could be made involving TRIPS Agreement violations and China. The more important claims are complex, data-dependent, and would require a whole of government approach by the Biden adminisitration.
Treating the “Foreign” Differently in Trade Secret Enforcement
Both the proposed amendments to the Criminal Law and the administrative rules on trade secret enforcement establish differential treatment for trade secret enforcement when a foreign element is involved
China IPR - Intellectual Property Developments in China 