Why does China increasingly treat intellectual property as a strategic instrument of national development, international influence, and global governance while the United States often continues to view it primarily through the lens of enforcement and compliance? Building on my recent article with former USPTO Director David Kappos in The National Interest, this essay argues that intellectual property should be viewed as a central issue of foreign policy rather than as a specialized area of law. Recent Chinese writings emphasize the development of an indigenous intellectual property knowledge system and greater international “discourse power,” while U.S. policy remains focused on criminal enforcement campaigns and “IP theft.” If the United States wishes to preserve a market-oriented international intellectual property system, it must modernize its own laws, renew engagement with China’s civil IP institutions, emphasize transparency and private rights, and recognize that competition increasingly extends to the institutions, concepts, and norms that will govern the future of innovation.
QBPC, RDPAC and Distinct Foreign Voices in China’s IP System
The closure of the Quality Brands Protection Committee (QBPC) and the apparent absorption of the Research and Development Pharmaceutical Association Committee of China (RDPAC) into new institutional structures marks the end of an important chapter in the development of China’s modern intellectual property system. Founded during China’s WTO-accession era, both organizations played influential roles in fostering dialogue, advancing legal and regulatory reforms, and helping foreign and Chinese stakeholders identify areas of common interest. Drawing on examples ranging from anti-counterfeiting enforcement to pharmaceutical intellectual property reform, this article argues that their effectiveness often stemmed not from exerting pressure, but from aligning foreign experience with China’s evolving development priorities. Their disappearance reflects China’s transformation from a country primarily concerned with protecting foreign intellectual property into one with its own powerful innovation constituency. At the same time, it raises important questions about whether newer institutions can continue to represent concerns that uniquely affect foreign companies while preserving the technical exchanges, professional engagement, and practical cooperation that contributed to decades of intellectual property reform.
New Trade Secret Protection Rules in China
China’s recently released 2026 trade secret rules are best understood not as a major legal reform but as an administrative modernization of an enforcement system badly in need of an update. Although international pressure played a role, the rules largely respond to China’s own technological development and growing need to protect confidential information. They show that IP change in China is driven at least as much by domestic economic evolution as by foreign demands.
China’s Patent Injunction Report: Key Insights and Recommendations
Should China make injunctions more difficult in patent civil cases? A recent report from a Chinese think tank makes the argument for such changes. The change, if implemented, could particularly impact foreign rights holders.
IPR’s and RPI’s: USPTO Takes an Important Step Forward
I was pleased to see that in a Memorandum issued on October 28, 2025, USPTO Director Squires has changed the role of real parties in interest (RPI) determinations in inter partes review […]
Insights on the China/EU TRIPS Dispute: DS/611
I will be a discussant on the recent WTO arbitral decision in DS/611 before a virtual meeting Friends of the Multilateralism Group (FMG). The FMG brings together WTO Ambassadors (past and present), retirees […]
Implications of the Recent WTO Ruling on China’s SEP Practices
The WTO recently released its decision in DS 611, the IP enforcement case involving China’s SEP practices and transparency of China’s judicial decision making. The case makes some progress on China’s important transparency obligations.
The Revised US-China Science and Technology Agreement – A Narrow Bridge To Drive Further Cooperation
The State Department has recently posted the revised US-China Science and Technology Agreement. The revised agreement was concluded in the waning months of the Biden Administration. The revised STA is more narrowly focused on government to government cooperation. It only partially addresses the range of IP-related issues. Nonetheless, it provides a framework for future cooperation.
Navigating the New Chinese Regulations on Foreign IP Disputes
On March 13, 2025, China’s State Council issued new regulations regarding resolving foreign-related IP disputes. These comments discuss how the regulations might be used to encourage Chinese government responses to foreign government and judicial agencies’ actions against Chinese companies defending or asserting their rights overseas.
US-China Tech Competition Workshop And Other Events
Asia Society is hosting a virtual workshop on US-China tech competition on February 4, 2025. In addition on February 6, 2025, Pomona College is hosting a lecture on the challenge of translating FRAND into Chinese.
China IPR - Intellectual Property Developments in China 