Software Protection in South-East Asia

close-up-2178341_1920In today’s blog post we are discussing how to protect your software IP rights in South-East Asia, where ICT and software sector has been booming in recent years, offering many promising opportunities to European SMEs. This article takes a closer look at the source code protection with copyrights, patent protection for software related inventions and discusses how to safely licence your software in South-East Asia. 

The Information Technology services and software sector in South-East Asia have been booming in recent years as South-East Asian nations continue to develop through many innovative technological solutions. In particular, South-East Asia is experiencing a rapid growth of Internet, digital and social media and mobile activities. With more than 320 million Internet users in 2017, increasing connectivity and therefore dependence on computer technology is to be expected in this region. This translates to growth in the software industry which leads to many promising opportunities for the European SMEs in the region, whose top-notch technology and know-how will be sought after.

Before entering South-East Asian markets, however, EU SMEs should be aware of the different IP rights and how they apply to the software industry, as well as the possible risk of IP infringement in these markets. This is increasingly important with many companies developing their own software, and software development being an ever-growing industry. European SMEs should thus have a comprehensive IP strategy in place when entering the promising markets of South-East Asia. Continue reading “Software Protection in South-East Asia” »

General Office of Communist Party of China and State Council issued Opinion regarding Reform and Innovation for Trial of Intellectual Property Cases

RegisteredToday’s blog post has been kindly shared with us by our China IPR SME Helpdesk external expert Mr. Charles Feng from East & Concord Partners. In this article, Mr. Feng interprets and explains the recent “Opinion regarding Improvement of Reform and Innovation for Intellectual Property related Trials” jointly issued by the General Office of Chinese Communist Party and the State Council.

On February 6, 2018, General Office of Chinese Communist Party and State Council jointly issued the official document namely “Opinion regarding Improvement of Reform and Innovation for Intellectual Property related Trials” (the “Opinion”). Vice President of Supreme People’s Court (“SPC”), Judge Tao, made interpretation to the IP Opinion during the press conference and was interviewed following the issuance on February 27.

The IP Opinion consisting of four parts includes the General Requirement, Perfection of IP Trial System, Enhancement of IP Court System, and Improvement of Arrangement and Coordination, which were specified as follows.

I General Requirement

The Opinion positioned the IP protection issue as the basic measure for encouragement and guarantee to innovation and creation that builds the foundation to the National Strategy to establish a Nation that is strong in IP as well as science and technology.

Comments by Charles Feng

The Opinion was the first strategic document issued by CPC and State Council, the top administrative body of China, which declared the IP protection as the major approach to protect innovation and development.  Continue reading “General Office of Communist Party of China and State Council issued Opinion regarding Reform and Innovation for Trial of Intellectual Property Cases” »

Protecting R&D Innovations in the Philippines

Mech Eng 2In today’s blog post we are discussing how to protect your IP in the Philippines while conducting R&D activities. You’ll learn more about Non-Disclosure contracts and patents and how to protect your new IP that is being created in the Philippines. 

Many European SMEs may not consider that they conduct any research and development (R&D) in the Philippines because they do not have a laboratory or research facility there, but in reality, a high proportion of these companies engage in activities which fall under at least one of the terms: research or development.

Some examples of R&D might include an SME that enters into a contract with a local company to use their engineers to develop a prototype into a commercial product or application; or an SME that works with local researchers in a Philippine university to design a digital database that is to be accessible via the Internet to users in Europe.

Even though the Philippines has its problems with R&D, as according to the Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017, published by the World Economic Forum, it ranked 83rd out of 138 countries in terms of technological readiness[1], the Philippines’ government is committed to making the country an ‘active player’ in the global knowledge economy[2]. This means that European SMEs can have promising business opportunities in the Philippines’ R&D sector as their know-how will be highly sought after.

IP is a critical consideration for European SMEs that come to the Philippines wishing to tap into this increasingly high-tech production network, or the talent pool for technology development. When engaging in R&D in the Philippines, new intellectual property is being created, the rights to which need to be clearly defined from the outset to avoid disagreements later. Continue reading “Protecting R&D Innovations in the Philippines” »

Structural changes in IPR registration and Enforcement bodies in China

EU SMEs should be made aware of important changes made to the structure of Intellectual Property registration, management and enforcement governing bodies in China which were announced in the context of the annual plenary session of the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) (also known as ‘Two Sessions’) which took place in early March. The restructuring of IP management and enforcement bodies is part of a wider reorganization of China’s  ministries and agencies in order to increase their efficiency. The date at which these changes will come into effect has not yet been announced.

The following existing entities are to merge together and fall under the umbrella of a newly created State Market Supervision Administration (SMSA):

  • State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO): This is the Chinese patent office and it is also in charge of the IP foreign affairs. This is the entity at which European SMEs register their patents in China.
  • State Administration of Industry and Commerce’s Function of Trademark Management: Currently Trademark registration is handled before CTMO (China Trade Mark Office), which is under SAIC (State Administration of Industry and Commerce).
  • General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine’s Function of “Place of Origin” Label Management (AQSIQ): They are currently in charge of Geographical Indications. GIs are registered here in China by the regional organisations responsible for these GIs.

Continue reading “Structural changes in IPR registration and Enforcement bodies in China” »

Chinese Court Issues First GUI Case Decision

17471462035_4b3ff87149_kToday’s blog post has been kindly shared with us by Ferrante Intellectual Property. The article discusses a recent Beijing IP Court case on the Graphical User Interface infringement. In it’s first ruling of the kind, the the IP Court has decided that the GUI cannot be protected separately from the type of the device it is applied to under the design patent protection. 

The Beijing IP Court issued a decision on the very first Graphical User Interface (GUI) infringement case in China. The lawsuit was lodged by Qihu 360 Inc. (Qihu) against Beijing Jiangmin Technology Co., Ltd (Jiangmin). Qihu claimed that the externalizing interface of Jiangmin’s software was identical to Qihu’s GUI design of “Computer with GUI” and that Jiangmin’s behaviour constituted patent infringement. In its decision, the Beijing IP Court dismisses Qihu’s claim and found that in determining the protection scope of a GUI design patent, the GUI design and that of the product using GUI shall be both considered. Hence, it held that the protection scope of Qihu’s GUI design patent shall be limited to the product of computer. Since Jiangmin’s software does not belong to the same or similar category of computer, Jiangmin’s behavior of providing the software does not constitute patent infringement. In this specific case, the users downloaded the software on their computers, which according to the Court does not constitute patent infringement. Even considering Jiangmin’s software as an “intermedium”, Jiangmin’s behavior of providing the software does not constitute indirect patent infringement. The decision gave rise to many debates, with experts arguing that existing patent law and regulations fail to properly protect GUI design. Continue reading “Chinese Court Issues First GUI Case Decision” »