Tag Archives: Business

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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” »

IP Protection for the ICT Industry in Malaysia

Posted on by
Reply

board-453758_1920In today’s blog post we are discussing IP protection in Malaysia’s ICT industry, which has recently been offering many promising business opportunities for the European SMEs. You’ll  learn more about patent and design protection and how to ensure that your brand is safe from counterfeiting. 

Malaysia has a booming ICT industry with the ICT sector being forecasted to contribute about 20% to the country’s GDP by 2020.[1] The ICT sector is being further supported by Malaysian government that has taken special interest in developing the Internet of Things (IoT) and cloud computing. The government namely hopes that adoption of cloud computing and building on the National Broadband Initiative, would accelerate Malaysia’s development into an advanced economy[2].

As the government is investing heavily into ICT- related projects like developing smart city infrastructure or strengthening cybersecurity, the ICT sector will offer many promising business opportunities for the European SMEs whose top-notch technology and know-how are highly sought after through encouragement of foreign investments in the ICT sector.

European ICT companies should, however, pay attention to protecting their IP rights when planning their business strategy for Malaysia’s market, because IP infringements are still relatively common in the country. Well-managed IP is often a key factor for business success and neglecting to register IP rights in Malaysia could easily end SMEs’ business endeavor in the country. Thus, a robust IPR strategy is needed, when entering Malaysia’s market. Continue reading “IP Protection for the ICT Industry in Malaysia” »

The Philippines: Application of The Doctrine of Equivalents

Posted on by
Reply

patent-without backgroundToday’s blog post on the application of the doctrine of equivalents in the Philippines has been kindly drafted for us by our external expert Ms. Editha Hechanova from Hechanova & Co., Inc. In her article, Ms. Hechanova discusses a patent infringement case in the Philippines to demonstrate the applicability of the doctrine of equivalents in the Philippines IP system, which is essentially meant to help fighting patent fraud. The article first appeared in the Managing Intellectual Property. 

The doctrine of equivalents is provided under Section 75.2 of the IP Code of the Philippines (Republic Act 8293). However, in deciding actions for patent cancellation and infringement, the Intellectual Property Office (IPOPHL) as well as the Supreme Court rely for the most part on American case law. The recent patent infringement case of Eddie T Dionisio v Visita International Phils, Inc and Lal K Tulsiani (IPV No 10- 2013-00034, July 28 2016) citing a cancellation case also between the parties shows this.

Dionisio was the registered owner of utility model number 2-2011-000646 for a multi-purpose articulated ladder issued by the IPOPHL on June 6 2012. On December 20 2013, Dionisio filed an administrative complaint for patent infringement against Visita claiming that the latter sold ladders with specifications similar to Dionisio’s patented ladders. Visita countered that there was no infringement since it had its own earlier filed utility model registration 2-2009-000166 issued on December 28 2010. Continue reading “The Philippines: Application of The Doctrine of Equivalents” »