综合一区欧美国产,99国产麻豆免费精品,九九精品黄色录像,亚洲激情青青草,久久亚洲熟妇熟,中文字幕av在线播放,国产一区二区卡,九九久久国产精品,久久精品视频免费

Op-Ed Contributors

Court cases indicate better IPR protection

By Haifeng Huang and Tony Chen (China Daily)
Updated: 2011-04-29 07:56
Large Medium Small

For most intellectual property rights (IPR) infringements in China, IPR owners can choose to lodge complaints with administrative agencies or sue in the local courts. But while administrative agencies continue to handle a large portion of IPR infringements, taking cases to court has been a growing trend in recent years, particularly for significant and complex cases.

For example, trademark infringement cases handled by the local administrations for industry and commerce have been fairly stable in terms of numbers: 50,534 in 2006, 50,318 in 2007, 56,634 in 2008, and 51,044 in 2009, with around one-fifth of them filed by foreign parties.

Related readings:
Court cases indicate better IPR protection Experts' voices of IPR issues in China
Court cases indicate better IPR protection IPR trust, communication and cooperation
Court cases indicate better IPR protection China quality regulator combats IPR infringement
Court cases indicate better IPR protection 6,000 people guilty of IPR infringement in 2010

However, there has been a huge increase in the number of trademark infringement cases filed with the courts - 2,521 in 2006, 3,855 in 2007, 6,233 in 2008, and 6,906 in 2009. And that trend is still continuing, as 8,480 cases were taken to court in 2010, a 22.5 percent increase on 2009, according to the White Paper on Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property issued by the Supreme People's Court on April 12, 2011.

What factors are driving this trend?

While administrative agencies can act swiftly and conduct proactive investigations, there are serious "issues" with administrative enforcement: no due process, delays, limited knowledge and resources in handling complex cases, limited deterrence, and the agencies are frequently afraid of being sued by the infringers, which results in deals being struck over penalties in many cases.

Recent policy changes in the Chinese judiciary and its attitudes toward IPR have played an important role in the move toward taking cases to court. "Judicial activism" has been explicitly adopted by the Supreme People's Court in recent years as a formal judicial policy, which requires all levels of courts in China to be more responsive to society's needs and more active in "resolving" issues by utilizing judicial discretion.

   Previous Page 1 2 Next Page  

分享按鈕
苏州市| 当雄县| 平泉县| 江山市| 台南县| 辽中县| 临夏市| 红原县| 长岭县| 南宁市| 昔阳县| 内乡县| 腾冲县| 杭锦后旗| 思南县| 漳平市| 嘉鱼县| 县级市| 天祝| 河东区| 昌吉市| 巨鹿县| 台北市| 四子王旗| 马边| 高唐县| 温泉县| 松阳县| 绥中县| 洛宁县| 榕江县| 隆林| 西充县| 和静县| 洮南市| 南投县| 石家庄市| 清徐县| 曲靖市| 钦州市| 瑞安市|