EN

LONGAN IP Newsletter No.8

2021-09-28

LongAn IP News

  • Introduction to IP Compliance Services-The 72nd LongAn Lecture was successfully held
  • Jiali Xu, the founding partner of LongAn, visited the China Office of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)again
  • The 2021 Quan Xianzhi Intellectual Property Scholarship Award Ceremony was successfully held

China IP News

  • The CNIPA Patent Examination Work Session–The examination period of high-value invention patents was reduced to 13.3 months, and the average examination period of invention patents was reduced to 19.1 months
  • Personal Information Protection Law (PRC)will come into effect on November 1, 2021
  • The Supreme People’s Court Issued Interpretations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (PRC) (Draft for Comments)
  • The CNIPA Issued the Revision Draft of the Guidelines for Patent Examination (Draft for Comments)
  • The CNIPA issued the Judgment Standard of General Trademark Illegal Act (Draft for Comments)

LongAn Typical Cases 

 

LongAn IP News

Introduction to IP Compliance Services-The 72nd LongAn Lecture was successfully held

On August 8, 2021, the 72nd LongAn Lecture was successfully held. Mr. Guo of LongAn Intellectual Property team gave a speech on the topic of the introduction of IP compliance services, focusing on intellectual property management system compliance, product compliance, trademark compliance, trade secrets compliance and other issues, which won unanimous praise.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/ZhI1rNl-TN1bacawjs0B3Q

 

Mr. Jiali Xu, the founding partner of LongAn, visited the China Office of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) again

On August 13, at the invitation of the China Office of the WIPO, Mr. Jiali Xu, the founding partner of LongAn, as the vice president of Beijing Intellectual Property Association, visited the office and communicated the future cooperation matters adequately with the presidents of the Association.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/n1uSoBkFrRloxhh5OMwXxA

 

The 2021 Quan Xianzhi Intellectual Property Scholarship Award Ceremony was successfully held

The 2021 Quan Xianzhi Intellectual Property Scholarship Award Ceremony was held on August 24, 2021 in the form of a web conference. Ms. Cindy Xianzhi Quan, the Senior Partner of LongAn, awarded certificates to the award-winning students of Shanghai Jiaotong University, and had an in-depth communication with students on topics such as the Cyber Security Law, the Data Security Law, the Personal Information Protection Law. Finally, Ms. Quan answered the questions raised by the students based on her own experience in detail.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/KebWParurxLgWPZitkmDgw

 

China IP News

The CNIPA Patent Examination Work Session–The examination period of high-value invention patents was reduced to 13.3 months, and the average examination period of invention patents was reduced to 19.1 months

On August 19, the CNIPA held a work session on patent examination in Beijing.

 

At the work session, Mr. Changyu Shen, the director of the CNIPA and other relevant department heads explained the actual results obtained in the patent examination, the problems faced, improvement proposals, etc. Mr. Shen mentioned in his speech that while the examination period for high-value patents was reduced to 13.3 months and the average examination period for invention patents was reduced to 19.1 months, the user satisfaction for examination quality has also been steadily improved.

https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2021/8/23/art_53_169612.html

 

The National People’s Congress (PRC) passed the Personal Information Protection Law, which will come into effect on November 1, 2021

On August 20, 2021, the 30th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 13th National People’s Congress (PRC) passed the Personal Information Protection Law (PRC), which will come into effect on November 1, 2021.

 

Scope of application: This law shall also apply to the processing outside the territory of the People’s Republic of China of the personal information of natural persons within the territory of the People’s Republic of China under any of the following circumstances:

 

  1. Forthe purpose of providing products or services to natural persons inside China;
  2. Analyzing or evaluating the behavior of natural persons inside China;
  3. Any other circumstances as stipulated by laws and administrative regulations.

Cross-border provision of personal information: Where personal information processors truly need to provide personal information to any party outside the territory of the People’s Republic of China for business needs, among others, they shall meet one of the following conditions:

(1) Security assessment organized by the national cyberspace administration has been passed in accordance with Article 40 of this law;

(2) Personal information protection certification has been conducted by a specialized institution according to provisions issued by national cyberspace administration;

(3) A contract has been concluded with an overseas recipient in accordance with the standard contract formulated by the national cyberspace administration, agreeing on both parties’ rights and obligations;

(4) Other conditions stipulated by laws, administrative regulations, or the national cyberspace administration.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/-s3uGx9k-m_PpqBbYflJRw

 

The Supreme People’s Court Issued Interpretations on Several Issues Concerning the application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (PRC) (Draft for Comments)

Recently, the Supreme People’s Court issued the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (PRC) (Draft for Comments). There are 34 Articles in the Draft for Comments, respectively explaining the relevant provisions of Article 2, Article 6, Article 8, Article 11, and Article 12 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law.

http://www.court.gov.cn/zixun-xiangqing-318221.html

 

The CNIPA Issued the Revision Draft of the Guidelines for Patent Examination (Draft for Comments)

In order to cooperate with the revision of the Patent Law and its implementation rules, the CNIPA issued the Revision Draft of the Guidelines for Patent Examination (Draft for Comments) (hereinafter referred to as the Draft for Comments). There are 9 contents in the Draft for Comments including  relevant provisions on the improvement of the design system, relevant procedural provisions of the PCT, relevant provisions on compensation for duration of patent right, relevant provisions on patent open licensing, relevant provisions on the review of invalid cases in the early settlement mechanism of drug patent disputes, the relevant regulations for responding to emergencies such as the epidemic, the relevant regulations for improving the quality and efficiency of examination, etc.

https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2021/8/3/art_75_166474.html

 

The CNIPA issued the Judgment Standard of General Trademark Illegal Act (Draft for Comments)

On August 17, the CNIPA issued the Judgment Standard of General Trademark Illegal Act (Draft for Comments). There are 34 Articles in the Judgment Standard, clarifying the definition of counterfeiting registered trademarks, the status of counterfeiting registered trademarks, the handling of illegal publicity of well-known trademarks, etc.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/i4SEW3CipKk7H8vpEmE38Q

 

 

 

LongAn Typical Cases

 

Case 1： Tencent Company represented by LongAn Law Firm won the case against “Jinri Kandian” for the dispute of transplanting WeChat public account article to constitute unfair competition

 

[SUMMARY]

  1. Recently, Tencent Company (the Plaintiff) represented by LongAn Law Firm won the lawsuit in an unfair competition case with some consulting company in Guangzhou.
  2. The Yuexiu People’s Court in Guangzhou made a first-instance judgment and determined that the APP of “Jinri Kandian” and the website operated by the consulting company in Guangzhou “transplanted” articles from the WeChat official account operated by Tencent Company, which constituted unfair competition. After the trial, the court adopted LongAn’s claim of the CPM advertising fee standard on the WeChat public account platform and calculated the economic losses caused by the consulting company in Guangzhou to Tencent Company.
  3. The court judged the defendant to compensate the plaintiff RMB 2 million for economic losses and RMB 200,000 for reasonable expenses. At present, this judgment has come into effect.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/MNsGUCrY1KiJjMYUapGD7w

 

 

Case 2: The anti-unfair competition case represented by LongAn Law Firm won in a retrial case by the Supreme People’s Court

 

[SUMMARY]

  1. Recently, Shenzhen Bolinda Technology Co., Ltd. (the Plaintiff) represented by LongAn Law Firm won the case against unfair competition in the use of special packaging and decoration of well-known goods without authorization by Shenzhen Aitengda Electronic Materials Co., Ltd. (the Defendant 1) and Zhuhai Zhongding Chemical Co., Ltd. (the Defendant 2). This case was once again won by the Intellectual Property Tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court after winning the first and second trials.
  2. The plaintiff sued the defendants to the court for the alleged infringement of the special packaging and decoration of its well-known goods. In order to raise the trial level to the Intermediate Court, we designed to claim the compensation of RMB 5 million. Before the prosecution, we found that the Defendant 1 had ceased its production and the actual controller of the Defendant 1 established Zhuhai Zhongding Chemical Co., Ltd. (the Defendant 2). We believed that the two companies constituted a mixed corporate personality, so we listed Zhuhai Zhongding Company as the second defendant and requested it to bear joint and several liability.
  3. The first instance judged that the two defendants immediately ceased their unfair competition and compensated the plaintiff a total of RMB 1 million. The court of second instance upheld the judgment of the first instance. The two defendants dissatisfied with the judgment, and filed a retrial to the Supreme People’s Court. The Supreme People’s Court rejected the appeal on the grounds that the retrial request lacked factual basis, and then it upheld the original judgment.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/kqRYYjWT5P9ZnAbRZN_Abw

 

 

Case 3: Beijing Miantian Company represented by LongAn Law Firm won the first-instance lawsuit against Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Company for commercial discrediting of unfair competition

 

[SUMMARY]

  1. Recently, Beijing Miantian Company represented by LongAn Law Firm won the first-instance lawsuit against Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Companyfor commercial discrediting of unfair competition.
  2. On November 4, 2019, the Beijing High People’s Court ruled that in the two cases involving Miantian Company and Beijing MUJI Co., Ltd. jointly suing Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Company regarding trademark infringement, the court found that Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Company constituted a trademark infringement and should bear such legal responsibilities as stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, and compensating for losses, etc.
  3. From November 18, 2019 to December 18, 2019, Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Company issued several public statements through “MUJI Official Flagship Store” in Tmall and their physical stores, announcing that their trademark “MUJI” was “squatted by others in bad faith”. Beijing Miantian Company believed that the actions of Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Company misled the public to believe that the towels and quilts, etc. branded “MUJI” and provided by Miantian Company were counterfeit goods, and it caused losses to Miantian Company, which constituted a commercial disparaging act of unfair competition. Therefore, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Chaoyang People’s Court.
  4. The court of first instance ruled that these public statements issued by Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Company constituted unfair competition for commercial discrediting against Beijing Miantian Company. The two defendants jointly compensated Beijing Miantian Company RMB 300,000 for economic losses and RMB 100,000 for reasonable expenses. Meanwhile, the court ruled that the two defendants published written statements in “MUJI Official Flagship Store” in Tmall and their physical stores in mainland China to eliminate the impact of commercial discrediting.

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/6WifZxnbnkxKv7Fuz8a_Eg

 

 

 

For more detailed information, please follow us: