Infographic: Protecting IP in the Green Tech Sector in China

European SMEs will have numerous opportunities in the green tech sector around the world as the Paris Agreement enters into force. However, SMEs should pay special attention to protecting their IP rights when entering to the lucrative market of China because counterfeiting and other IP infringements still persist in China. For today’s blog post we have chosen to share with you an infographic that will provide you with a basic and easy to read  overview of IP protection in the green tech sector in China.  

china-ipr-sme-h_14627149_0ec6aebec211d3312bb31c923311171ddf065b7f

COP 21, COP 22 et la protection juridique de la “Technologie Verte”

clean-techAvec l’entrée en vigueur de l’Accord de Paris, les PME européennes engagées dans les technologies vertes auront de nombreuses opportunités d’affaires dans le monde entier. Cependant, lorsqu’ils entrent dans les marchés lucratifs de la Chine ou de l’Asie du Sud-Est, les entreprises doivent accorder une attention particulière aux droits de propriété intellectuelle, car la contrefaçon et les autres formes de violation des droits de propriété intellectuelle persistent encore dans ces régions. Cet article de blogue  explore la protection de la propriété intellectuelle dans l’industrie des technologies propres et a été  rédigé pour nous par notre expert en propriété intellectuelle Maître Philippe Girard-Foley de GIRARD-FOLEY & Associates.

Introduction 

Alors que s’ouvre la COP 22 visant à mettre en œuvre les principes de l’Accord de Paris sur le climat entré en vigueur le 4 novembre dernier, une question qui se pose aux juristes est celle de la protection des avancées technologiques dans ce domaine. Les technologies vertes visent un objectif qui dépasse le seul profit mais n’en demeurent pas moins une branche de l’industrie, confrontée aux mêmes contraintes de rentabilité et de succès. Comme l’industrie “traditionnelle”, l’industrie verte a besoin de la propriété intellectuelle pour assurer la protection du retour sur investissement technologique et commercial. Mais la propriété intellectuelle s’est elle adaptée aux spécificités de cette industrie? Quelles sont les questions que doivent se poser les industriels de la technologie verte en matière de propriété intellectuelle? Cet article, basé sur une présentation de son auteur dans le cadre d’un webinar organisé le 7 octobre 2016 par le South-Asia IPR SME Helpdesk, un programme co-financé par l’Union Européenne et par la Chambre de Commerce Européenne en Malaisie, tente d’apporter des réponses pratiques à ces questions.

  1. Technologie verte et propriété intellectuelle : une affaire de choix

1.1. La technologie verte étant d’apparition récente, est par essence une industrie d’innovation.

Il en résulte une plus grande dépendance quant à la protection que peut offrir la propriété intellectuelle, mais aussi:

1.1.1. un coût plus important avant la mise sur le marché, ceci résultant :

  • du contenu élevé en recherche & développement (“R&D”) dans le produit final; et
  • de la nécessité de recourir, avec le brevet, à un mode de protection des actifs immatériels onéreux.

Continue reading “COP 21, COP 22 et la protection juridique de la “Technologie Verte”” »

Enforcing IPR in China: a Case Study

courtEnforcing your IP rights in case of an infringement is one of the key factors of business success in China as the reputation of being litigious eventually discourages counterfeiters from infringing on your products. In today’s blog post we will take a look at how one French garment company dealt with IP infringements and what did the company learn from its experience.

Creative industry goods are valuable not only for their designs but often their trade marks too, and businesses should be aware that intellectual property rights (IPR) infringement can target either or both of these types of intangible assets. However, in actual cases of infringement enforcement processes are not always straightforward, and careful consideration and adaptation of strategies is necessary, as illustrated in this case study of a French garment designer.

Background

A French company “A” entered into a joint venture agreement with a Chinese company “B” in order to manufacture and export a seasonal garment collection to Europe. To minimise costs, the design of each individual piece of clothes was not been protected in China. However the trade mark appearing on the collar label was registered.

“A” was providing their new patterns to “B”, 3 to 4 months prior to the launch of their collection. “B” was then sub-contracting the manufacture of the garments to another factory of which “A” was not aware. The goods were then exported by “B” to “A”, who was receiving the goods for distribution in their stores. Additionally, “A” did not have any local representative in China to supervise and check production and quality.

After two or three collections were manufactured, the quality of the production started going down to the extent that “A” had to refuse entire shipments of goods. As the poor quality of the products was putting its business in jeopardy, “A” was forced to find an alternative way to manufacture the goods. Continue reading “Enforcing IPR in China: a Case Study” »

Upcoming Reform: Registered Designs Regime in Singapore

shutterstock_385731427Singapore has recently finalized the review of registered designs and is ready to implement the amendments to the Registered Designs Act. These amendments are meant to bring Singapore’s design rights in line with the changing environment and improve the country’s design industry. Our external IP experts Mr. Max Ng and Ms. You Na Lee from the Gateway Law Corporation have kindly drafted for us today’s blog post, where they discuss these amendments and their implications to the European SMEs. 

Introduction

In light of the recent technological advances and evolving business practices in the designs industry, the Ministry of Law (the “MinLaw”) and the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (the “IPOS”) commenced their review of the registered designs regime in Singapore in 2014, conducting 2 rounds of public consultations, and numerous focus group talks and one-to-one consultations with design associations, business, IP practitioners and academics. They have completed their joint review and released a “Final Report on the Review of Singapore’s Registered Designs Regime”, which sets out their recommendations to amend the Registered Designs Act (the “RDA”) to keep abreast of the changes in the industry.

Aims

The proposed reform is to complement the “Design 2025 Masterplan” released by DesignSingapore Council in March 2016, which sets out the government initiatives and policy framework to develop Singapore into a creativity- and innovation-driven economy and ecosystem by supporting capitalisation of the intellectual property in Singapore. Design is identified as one of the key pillars and catalysts to propel such a paradigm shift.

In the meantime, it seeks to protect interests of the users and the public, support business certainty and remain in line with international best practices, especially with other major markets. The MinLaw and IPOS have therefore taken into account different interests of all stakeholders and decided to implement some changes to the current designs regime to provide for sustainability and growth of the designs industry in Singapore. Continue reading “Upcoming Reform: Registered Designs Regime in Singapore” »