The Inter-Ministerial Joint Meeting on Construction of Intellectual Property Powerhouse Releases Report on the Construction and Development of an Intellectual Property Powerhouse (2024)

Date: 30 October 2024

The Outline for Building an Intellectual Property Powerhouse (2021-2035) and the 14th Five- Year Plan of IP Protection and Use have set a series of primary targets for the development of intellectual property in China during the 14th Five-Year Plan period. According to the Report on the Construction and Development of an Intellectual Property Powerhouse (2024), by 2023, many of the eight projected targets had been met or exceeded and there had been significant growth in all areas.

Source: CNIPA  

https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2024/10/30/art_53_195745.html

国家知识产权强国建设工作部际联席会议办公室发布《知识产权强国建设发展报告（2024年）》

日期：2024-10-30

《知识产权强国建设纲要（2021－2035年）》《“十四五”国家知识产权保护和运用规划》为我国“十四五”期间知识产权发展设定了一系列主要指标。根据《知识产权强国建设发展报告（2024年）》，8项预期性指标均在2023年实现明显增长或保持在较高水平，总体进展顺利。

资料来源：国家知识产权局  2024-10-30

新闻链接：https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2024/10/30/art_53_195745.html

Beijing Intellectual Property Court Releases Analysis of Patent Grant and Confirmation Cases (2014-2024) and Guidelines for Handling Subject Qualification Certificates in Foreign-related Cases (2024 Edition)

Date: 17 October 2024

On 17 October, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court held an International Open Day, comprehensively reviewing its ten-year development history and releasing two documents summarising its judicial experience in intellectual property cases: the Analysis of Patent Granting and Confirmation Cases (2014-2024) and Guidelines for Handling Subject Qualification Certificates of Foreign-related Cases (2024 Edition).

The Analysis of Patent Grant and Confirmation Cases (2014-2024) contains 58 typical cases of patent grant and confirmation. As the court with exclusive jurisdiction over the administrative cases relating to  patent grant and confirmation nationwide, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court has identified three major trends in patent grant and confirmation cases over the past decade:(1) The overall number of cases has shown a steady upward trend: as of September 2024, the Court had accepted 14,345 patent grant and confirmation administrative cases, an annual growth rate of 5.65%. Cases concerning the confirmation of invention patents accounted for the largest proportion. (2) Nearly 30% of the cases involved new technologies and emerging industries, with the highest proportion relating to next-generation information technology and high-end equipment manufacturing industries. (3) Over 20% of the cases involved foreign parties, with litigants from more than 100 countries and regions across all five continents.

The Guidelines for Handling Subject Qualification Certificates in Foreign-related Cases (2024 Edition) are divided into chapters by country, covering 18 countries across all five continents. The document contains a detailed list of the required documents for proving subject qualification, and details of the notarization and certification process, providing clear guidance to the parties.

Source: ‘Jinfawangshi’ Beijing High Court WeChat Official Account

 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/HD5LPbfqKzvfX35XyBjF2A

北京知识产权法院发布《专利授权确权审判案析（2014-2024）》与《涉外案件主体资格证明文件办理参考》（2024年版）

日期：2024-10-17

10月17日，北京知识产权法院举办国际开放日，全面回顾十年发展历程，并发布《涉外案件主体资格证明文件办理参考》（2024年版）和《专利授权确权审判案析（2014-2024）》两项知识产权司法经验总结成果。

《专利授权确权审判案析（2014-2024）》包含58件专利授权确权典型案例。作为全国范围内专利授权确权行政案件专属管辖法院，近十年来北京知识产权法院受理的专利授权确权案件呈现三大特点：（1）案件数量整体呈现稳步上升态势。截至2024年9月，共受理专利授权确权行政案件14345件，年均增幅5.65%，发明专利确权案件占比最高。（2）近三成案件涉及新技术新产业，其中又以涉新一代信息技术、涉高端设备制造产业占比最多。（3）超两成案件涉及国外主体。当事人遍及全球五大洲100多个国家和地区。

《涉外案件主体资格证明文件办理参考》（2024年版）按照国别划分章节，地域涵盖五大洲18个国家，详细列明主体资格证明所需文件清单、公证认证办理流程，为当事人提供了明确指引。

资料来源：京法网事  2024-10-17

新闻链接：https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/HD5LPbfqKzvfX35XyBjF2A

The Intellectual Property Court of the SPC Releases Five Rulings on Infringement Cases Involving New Plant Varieties, Demonstrating a Firm Stance Against Infringement of Plant Variety Rights

Date: 16 October 2024

The Intellectual Property Court of the SPC released details of rulings in five typical cases of plant variety right infringement on 16 October - World Food Day. Among these, three cases involved second-instance rulings that either reversed the first-instance judgment and found the defendant guilty of infringement, or increased the compensation amount compared to that awarded at first instance. The names, key points of the rulings, and case numbers of the five typical cases are as follows:

1. ‘Lucinda’ Potato Plant Variety Infringement Case: If the plant variety rights owner failed to fulfill its duty of diligence and reasonable care regarding the authorized variety control samples used for testing, resulting in an inability to establish a logical chain of evidence, its claims should be dismissed. (2022) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong No. 278
2. ‘Hongyunlai’ Pineapple Plant Variety Infringement Case: If the plant variety rights owner notarizes the entire rights protection process (purchasing the allegedly infringing seedlings and notarizing the purchase), and properly cultivates the seedlings to meet the identification requirements, it should be deemed to have fulfilled its duty to provide diligent evidence and exercised reasonable care. (2022) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong No. 1362
3. ‘W68’ Maize Inbred Line Parent Technical Secret Infringement Case: The specific amount of compensation that the infringer should bear for violating the technical secrets of hybrid parent lines can be determined by considering factors such as the parent’s breeding cost, characteristics, competitive advantages, substitutability, and market contribution rate. (2023) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong No. 2562
4. ‘Xiaojindouhong No. 1’ Vigna Angularis Plant Variety Infringement Case: If the infringer engages in intentional infringement, operates without a seed production and operation license, and sells seeds without proper labeling, the People's Court may choose a higher price within the authorized seed price range as the basis for calculating actual damages. (2023) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong No. 1020
5. ‘Lihe 228’ Corn Plant Variety Infringement Case: The facts of the criminal defendant's unlicensed sale of infringing seeds, as established in the effective criminal judgment related to seeds, can be accepted as established infringement facts in civil infringement cases, without the need for the rights holder to provide evidence. (2023) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong No. 1383

According to data from the SPC, since the establishment of the Intellectual Property Court on January 1, 2019, the number of plant variety cases accepted has been increasing year by year. In 2023, the Court received 180 new plant variety cases and concluded 166, representing an annual growth rate of 16.1% and 100%, respectively. Among these, over 85% of the cases were related to plant variety infringement disputes, with a success rate of 90% for plant variety rights holders.

Source: The Intellectual Property Court of the SPC

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3538.html

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3540.html

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3539.html

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3546.html
https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3533.html

最高人民法院知识产权法庭发布5件侵害植物新品种权典型案例，彰显对侵害植物新品权行为的严打立场

日期：2024-10-16

最高人民法院知识产权法庭在10月16日—世界粮食日发布5件侵害植物新品种权典型案例，其中包含3件二审改判被诉侵权人构成侵权或提高原审判赔额的案例。5件典型案例的名称、裁判要旨和案号如下：

1. “露辛达” 马铃薯植物新品种侵权案——品种权人未能对用于检测的授权品种对照样品尽到勤勉举证和合理注意义务，导致具有逻辑性的证据链条无法构建时，其诉讼请求应被驳回——（2022）最高法知民终278号
2. “红运来” 凤梨植物新品种侵权案——品种权人对维权全过程进行公证，且对公证购买的被诉侵权种苗采取妥善种植方式使其符合鉴定要求的，应认定其已尽到勤勉举证和合理注意义务——（2022）最高法知民终1362号
3. “W68” 玉米自交系亲本技术秘密侵权案——计算侵权人因侵害杂交种亲本技术秘密应当承担的具体赔偿数额，可综合考虑该亲本的育种成本、特征特性等竞争优势及其可替代性、对育成的杂交种市场获益的贡献率等因素确定——（2023）最高法知民终2562号
4. “笑金某红一号” 小豆植物新品种侵权案——侵权人存在故意侵权、未取得种子生产经营许可证、销售无标识标签种子等情节，人民法院可在授权种子价格区间中选择较高价格作为实际损失计算依据——（2023）最高法知民终1020号
5. “利某228” 玉米植物新品种侵权案——在先生效的涉种子刑事裁判认定的刑事被告人无证销售侵权种子的事实可以作为民事侵权案件中权利人无须举证证明的侵权事实——（2023）最高法知民终1383号

最高人民法院数据显示，最高人民法院知识产权法庭自2019年1月1日成立以来，受理的植物新品种案件逐年递增。2023年，法庭新收植物新品种案件180件，审结166件，同比分别增长16.1%和100%。其中，85%以上的案件为侵害植物新品种纠纷，品种权人胜诉率达90%。

资料来源：最高人民法院知识产权法庭  2024-10-16

新闻链接：https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3538.html

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3540.html

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3539.html

https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3546.html
https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-3533.html

TAGS

• China
• Patents
• PVRs
• Plant Variety Rights
• unfair competition