• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Beijing: Revised Guidelines for Patent Infringement Determination

17. May 2017

The Beijing Higher People’s Court officially issued on 20 April 2017 the revised Guidelines for Patent Infringement Determination, which standardise the judicial rules applicable to patent infringement cases within the Court’s jurisdiction. This decision could influence upcoming legal decisions.

 

Beijing_Temple_of_Heaven

Although the Guidelines are local judicial interpretations, given the fact that the Court is the final-instance court for patentability cases within the country, and has handled massive patent infringement cases, the Guidelines should be influential as an important reference in relevant judicial practice.

The newly issued “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Determination” made revisions based on the “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Determination” issued in 2013 in order to solve outstanding problems in judgment, unify judgment standards, combine summaries of the judgment experience by Beijing High People’ Court and adapt to the latest laws, regulations and judicial interpretations.

 

The revised Guidelines are divided into 6 parts with 153 Articles, containing of about 21, 000 Chinese characters. They provide guidance on the determination of the following:

  1. protection scopes of invention and utility model patents;
  2. infringement of invention and utility model patents;
  3. protection scopes of design patents;
  4. design patent infringement,
  5. acts of patent infringement; and
  6. defense of patent infringement.

 

Specifically, this revision elaborates on the following six aspects:

  1. Added rules for claim construction: the new rules prescribe for the interpretation of such technical contents as usage environment features and subject matter titles, and introduce the interpretation principle of compliance with the object of invention, stipulating that the protection scope of a patent should not include solutions that cannot solve the technical problem or achieve the technical effect claimed by the patent (Art. 4);
  1. Refined rules on functional limitations and equivalent infringement: this revision specifies four factors of test for identifying equivalents to enhance operability (Art. 46-49) and states that alternative features which the patentee clearly knows or can foresee at the time of filing a patent application or amending the patent application are excluded from the equivalents (Art. 60);
  1. Refined rules on design patent infringement: this revision distinguishes the test for infringement of a design patent from the trademark confusion test (Art. 79) and stipulates how to determine and use the design space to evaluate the identicalness or similarity of two designs (Art. 82-83);
  1. Added rules on joint infringement and indirect infringement: this revision gives specific provisions on joint infringement and definition thereof, contributory infringement, induced infringement, and division of liabilities between an entrusting party/assignor/licensor and an entrusted party/assignee/licensee, and states that providing a certain product that is specially used for implementing the technical solution of a patent may constitute joint infringement (Art.116-122);
  1. Added rules on SEPs and GUIs based on other countries’ experience: Art. 149-153 stipulate the issuance of an injunction relief in SEPs-related litigation, obligations of the patent holder and the accused party during license negotiation on FRAND terms; Art. 73, 77, and 86-88 relate to determination of protection scope and infringement of design patents involving GUIs;
  1. Added rules on patents obtained in bad faith: the claim of a patent holder will be rejected if there is evidence proving that the patent is obtained from some known solutions or by using fabricated experimental data (Art. 126-127).

The revised Guidelines delineate the determination of protection scopes of patents and liabilities between different parties, thereby increasing the predictability of the trial rules on patent disputes. The publication of the revised Guidelines will benefit Beijing courts at all levels by providing them with unified judicial rules on adjudication of patent infringement cases.

 

> Our friends from China Patent Agent (H.K.) Ltd. have even more details about it. Check here.

 

Source:

Text: CPA Newsletter / Mondaq.com

Picture: “gyosimon” / Pixabay.com / CC0 License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconUnkategorisiert

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Unkategorisiert

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

28. August 2017
Intellectual property theft: Trump orders investigation against China

Intellectual property theft: Trump orders investigation against China

25. July 2017
WIPO: Goodbye Fee Irregularities – welcome Madrid e-Renewal

WIPO: Goodbye Fee Irregularities – welcome Madrid e-Renewal

14. July 2017
Global Innovation Index 2017: Switzerland #1, Netherlands strong growth

Global Innovation Index 2017: Switzerland #1, Netherlands strong growth

1. June 2017
Notice: From 1 October 2017 – New EU Trade Mark Regulation

Notice: From 1 October 2017 – New EU Trade Mark Regulation

28. April 2017
Brexit: United Kingdom to continue on ratification course for UPC

Brexit: United Kingdom to continue on ratification course for UPC

15. November 2016
EPO/EUIPO: New study shows intellectual property is good for the European economy

EPO/EUIPO: New study shows intellectual property is good for the European economy

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© MD LEGAL Patentanwalt, European Patent Attorney PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.