>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Intellectual Property Protection by Chinese Courts (2019)
中国法院知识产权司法保护状况(2019)
【法宝引证码】

Intellectual Property Protection by Chinese Courts (2019) 

中国法院知识产权司法保护状况(2019)

(2020) (2020年)

Introduction 前言
2019 was the 70thyear of the founding of the People's Republic of China. The same year saw the unfolding of the People's Courts' Fifth Five-Year Reform Programme (2019–2023).Guided by General-Secretary Xi Jinping's thought on Chinese socialism for the new era, the courts implemented the decisions and essential values of the 19thNational Congress of the Communist Party of China (“Party Congress”) and of the second, third and fourth plena of the 19th CCP Central Committee. They have also continued to foster the “four aspects of consciousness”, the “four matters of confidence” and the “two pillars to safeguard”, never losing sight of their original aspirations and mission. They pursued the national goal of building a complete xiaokang society, discharged adjudication duties based on the law and the constitution, and intensified reform of the adjudication system to improve adjudication efficiency, effectiveness, and judicial credibility. They have also ensured efficacious discharge of their adjudication duties. Having dedicated significant effort to building an effective team, the courts rebooted and renewed the intellectual property adjudication regime to further elevate the credibility and impact of China's intellectual property adjudication at the international level. By continuing to modernize the intellectual property adjudication regime and capacity, the courts have also enabled the delivery of robust judicial services and enactment of judicial safeguards to underpin the country's innovation-driven development and creation of a pro-business environment. 2019年是中华人民共和国成立70 周年,也是实施人民法院第五个五年改革纲要的开局之年。人民法院以习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想为指导,深入贯彻落实党的十九大和十九届二中、三中、四中全会精神,不断增强“四个意识”、坚定“四个自信”、做到“两个维护”,不忘初心、牢记使命,严格履行宪法和法律赋予的审判职责,持续深化审判体制机制改革,不断提升审判质效,着力打造过硬队伍,开创了知识产权司法保护工作新局面,知识产权司法公信力和国际影响力进一步提升,知识产权审判体系和审判能力现代化进程不断推进,为推动创新驱动发展、创造良好营商环境提供了有力司法服务和保障。
I. Leveraging the adjudication process for more effective protection   一、发挥审判职能作用,加强知识产权司法保护
The 19th CCP Central Committee's fourth plenary session issued important directives to advance Chinese socialism and modernize the national governance system and governance capabilities. The session also gave instructions for the country to improve systems and mechanisms to encourage technological innovation, redouble efforts to build an innovation-based country and strengthen national strategic technologies. To elevate China's technological and innovation capabilities, drive quality economic growth and implement our innovation-driven development strategy, we need greater protection and utilization intellectual property to fashion an effective incentive structure. As the courts “strive to make the people feel fairness and justice in every judicial case”—a goal that centers on the people and fair justice—intellectual property adjudication has become an important means to incentivize and protect innovation. 党的十九届四中全会作出坚持和完善中国特色社会主义制度、推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化重大部署,并提出了完善科技创新体制机制、加快建设创新型国家、强化国家战略科技力量的要求。加强知识产权保护和运用,形成有效的创新激励机制,是提升我国科技创新能力、推动经济高质量发展、推进创新驱动发展战略实施的必然选择。一年来,人民法院紧紧围绕“努力让人民群众在每一个司法案件中感受到公平正义”目标,坚持司法为民、公正司法主线,积极发挥知识产权审判工作在激励和保护创新中的重要作用。
In 2019, the courts have accepted a total of 481,793 cases, including first instance and second instance cases and applications for extraordinary legal remedy to reopen cases.475,853 cases(including carried forward cases) were concluded, representing a respective year-on-year increase of 44.16 % and 48.87%. 2019年,人民法院共新收一审、二审、申请再审等各类知识产权案件481793件,审结475853件(含旧存,下同),比2018年分别上升44.16%和48.87%。
(I) More effective adjudication of civil disputes (一)提升民事司法保护水平
Given the essential role of intellectual property adjudication in protecting innovation and in levelling the competitive playing field, adjudication has focused on encouraging technological innovation, promoting cultural transmission and maintaining market order to provide clear, consistent and predictable rules to guide adjudication and instill confidence among entrepreneurs and innovators. In 2019, the Supreme People's Court accepted2,504 new civil intellectual property cases and concluded 1,976 cases, respectively174.26% and 260.97% higher than the previous year. In the same year, the local courts accepted 399,031 and concluded 394,521 first instance civil cases, where the respective year-on-year increases were 40.79% and 44.02%. Among the newly accepted cases, 22,272 were patent cases (2.64% year-on-year increase); 65,209 trademark cases (25.41% year-on-year increase); 293,066 copyright cases (49.98% year-on-year increase). There were also 3,135 cases on technology contract disputes, (16.98% year-on-year increase) and 4,128 unfair competition cases, including 70 monopoly cases, (49.71% year-on-year increase). Other civil intellectual property disputes constituted 11,221 cases, or 49.71% more than last year. For second instance cases, 49,704 were accepted and 48,710 concluded, translating to a year-on-year increase of 79.95% and 85.29% respectively. 人民法院充分发挥知识产权审判保护创新和维护公平竞争的职能作用,注重通过裁判激励科技创新,促进文化传播,维护竞争秩序,为创新主体提供明确、稳定、可预期的规则指引,让创新创业者坚定信心,提升社会创新活力。2019 年,最高人民法院新收知识产权民事案件2504件,审结1976件,比2018年分别上升174.26%和260.07%。地方各级人民法院共新收知识产权民事一审案件399031件,审结394521件,分别比2018年上升40.79% 和44.02%。其中,新收专利案件22272件,同比上升2.64% ;商标案件65209件,同比上升25.41% ;著作权案件293066件,同比上升49.98% ;技术合同案件3135件,同比上升16.98% ;竞争类案件4128 件,同比下降1.25% ;其他知识产权民事纠纷案件11221件,同比上升49.95%。地方各级人民法院共新收知识产权民事二审案件49704 件,审结48710件,同比分别上升79.95% 和85.29% 。
High profile civil disputes involving intellectual property heard and concluded by the courts during the year include: French automotive parts manufacturer Valeo Systems D'Essuyage (plaintiff- appellee)vs. Lukasi Car Accessories(Xiamen) Co. Ltd (respondent-appellant) and Fuke Car Accessories (Xiamen) Co. Ltd. (respondent-appellant)et al. involving a utility patent infringement dispute; Honda Motor Company (plaintiff-appellee- petitioner) vs. Hengsheng Xintai (Chongqing) Trade Company (respondent-appellant-petitionee), Hensim (Chongqing)Group et al. (respondent- appellant-petitionee) involving a trademark infringement dispute; Hemujia Medical Management Consultancy(Beijing) Co., Ltd (plaintiff,-appellant-petitioner)vs. Hemujia Obstetrics andGynaecology Hospital (Fuzhou)(respondent-appellee- petitionee) involving unfair competition; Cai Xinguang (plaintiff-appellant) vs. Runping Commerce (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd(respondent-appellee) involving infringement of new plant variety; and copyright infringement case of Shanren Sculpture (Hebei) Co., Ltd(plaintiff-appellant) vs. Zhongding Garden Sculptures (Hebei) Co., Ltd et al. (respondent-appellant) and the People's Government of Sanhe Township, Bozhou District, Zunyi Cityet al. (respondent-appellee). 一年来,人民法院审结的具有较大社会影响的知识产权民事案件有:厦门卢卡斯汽车配件有限公司等与法国瓦莱奥清洗系统公司等侵害发明专利权案;本田技研工业株式会社与重庆恒胜鑫泰贸易有限公司等侵害商标权案;和睦家医疗管理咨询(北京)有限公司与福州和睦佳妇产医院等侵害商标权及不正当竞争案;蔡新光与广州市润平商业有限公司侵害植物新品种权案;河北山人雕塑有限公司与河北中鼎园林雕塑有限公司等侵害著作权案;等等。
(II) More rigorous legality review of administrative actions (二)强化对行政行为的司法审查
The courts have strengthened legality review of intellectual property granted and validated by administrative authorities and of administrative enforcement actions. In 2019, the Supreme People's Court accepted1,066 intellectual property cases involving administrative disputes and concluded 884 cases. Compared to last year, the number of cases has risen by70.83% and 52.15% respectively. The same year saw local courts accepting 16,134first instance administrative cases (19.11% increase year-on-year), 1,661were patent cases (8.14% increase year-on-year), 14,457 trademark cases (20.56%increase year-on-year) and 16 copyright cases. 17, 938 first instance cases were concluded (89.74% increase year-on-year). Local courts also accepted 7,304(104.88% increase year-on-year) second instance administrative cases, and 5,942cases were concluded (84.71% increase year-on-year), of which, decision was upheld for 4,791 cases, first instance judgement was amended for 1,026 cases; 4cases were remanded for retrial, 613 cases withdrawn, and 132 cases overruled. 各级人民法院着力强化对知识产权授权确权行政行为和行政执法行为合法性的审查。2019年,最高人民法院新收和审结知识产权行政案件1066件和884 件,比2018 年分别上升70.83%和52.15%。地方各级人民法院共新收知识产权行政一审案件16134件,比2018年上升19.11%。其中,专利案件1661 件,同比上升8.14% ;商标案件14457件,同比上升20.56% ;著作权案件16件,与2018 年持平。审结一审案件17938件,同比上升89.74%。地方各级人民法院新收知识产权行政二审案件7304件,审结5942件,比2018 年分别上升104.88% 和84.71%。其中,维持原判4791件,改判1026 件,发回重审4 件,撤诉613 件,驳回起诉132 件。
High profile intellectual property-related administrative disputes heard and concluded by the people's courts during the year include Huawei. Technologies, Co, Ltd(plaintiff-appellee) v. Samsung Electronics Co, Ltd (Third-party-appellant) and CNIPA (respondent) involving an administrative over the invalidation of a patent; and Kangzhi Lesi Network Technology (Beijing)Co., Ltd (plaintiff-appellee-petitionee) v. Meiyou Information Technology (Xiamen) Co., Ltd (third party-appellant-petitioner) and CNIPA(respondent-appellant) involving an administrative dispute over the invalidation of a trademark. 一年来,人民法院审结的具有较大社会影响的知识产权行政案件有:三星电子株式会社、华为技术有限公司与国家知识产权局发明专利权无效宣告请求行政案;北京康智乐思网络科技有限公司与国家知识产权局、厦门美柚股份有限公司商标权无效宣告请求行政案;等等。
(III) Stricter sanctions on intellectual property crimes (三)加大对知识产权犯罪行为惩罚力度
Intellectual property crimes were subject to more rigorous adjudication to clean up the market, therefore better defend intellectual property from criminal infringement. In 2019, the local courts accepted 5,242 first instance intellectual property-related criminal cases, 21.37% higher than last year, including 4,982 cases relating to infringement of registered trademarks ( 21.01% increase year-on-year), and 210 on copyright infringement (34.62% increase year-on-year). 人民法院依法审理知识产权刑事案件,加大刑事保护力度,净化市场环境。2019年,地方各级人民法院共新收侵犯知识产权刑事一审案件5242件,同比上升21.37%。其中,侵犯注册商标类刑事案件4982 件,同比上升21.01% ;侵犯著作权类刑事案件210件,同比上升34.62%。
At the local level, 5,075 first instance cases were concluded during the year (24.88%increase year-on-year), including 2,134 cases involving counterfeiting of registered trademarks (15.23% increase year-on-year), 2,279 cases involved selling goods bearing counterfeit registered trademarks (32.19% increase year-on-year), 423 were cases of illegal manufacturing or sale of goods bearing illegally produced registered trademarks (38.69% increase year-on-year); 1 case involved counterfeiting patents, 191 were criminal infringement of copyright, (40.44% increase year-on-year), 8 involved selling infringing reproductions (33.33% increase year-on-year), and 39 involved trade secret infringement crime (no change from last year). 地方各级人民法院共审结侵犯知识产权刑事一审案件5075 件,同比上升24.88% 。在审结的侵犯知识产权刑事一审案件中,假冒注册商标刑事案件2134件,同比上升15.23% ;销售假冒注册商标的商品刑事案件2279 件,同比上升32.19% ;非法制造、销售非法制造的注册商标标识刑事案件423件,同比上升38.69% ;假冒专利刑事案件1 件;侵犯著作权刑事案件191件,同比上升40.44% ;销售侵权复制品刑事案件8件,同比上升33.33% ;侵犯商业秘密刑事案件39件,与去年持平。
For second instance intellectual property cases involving criminal offences, the local courts accepted 808 cases (18.30% increase year-on-year), and 807 cases were concluded (23.70% increase year-on-year). 地方各级人民法院共新收涉知识产权的刑事二审案件808件,同比上升18.30% ;审结807件,同比上升20.81%。
High profile criminal cases involving intellectual property heard and concluded by the people's courts during the year include: Yang Fengming, Yang Maogang et al. for counterfeiting a registered trademark; Lin Yixiang et al. involving infringement of tradesecrets; Xu Zhenwei et al. involving counterfeiting of registered mark; and Chen Li et al. involving trademark infringement. 一年来,人民法院审结的具有较大社会影响的知识产权刑事案件有:杨明凤、杨茂淦等犯假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪案;林义翔等犯侵犯商业秘密罪案;许振纬等犯假冒注册商标罪案;陈力等犯侵犯著作权罪案;等等。
Intellectual property adjudication has made steady progress in the year, and has scored higher in quality and effectiveness. The key features for 2019 are: 2019年,知识产权审判工作稳中有进,审判质效持续向好,呈现出以下特点。
New highs in caseload. With increased social awareness of intellectual property right and greater credibility of the courts in adjudicating intellectual property disputes, the courts have faced a spike in caseload. The total number of accepted and concluded cases for the year 2019 were at historic high, both recording a year-over-year increase of more than 40%. By geographical location, Beijing accepted80,165 cases, Shanghai 23,580 cases, Jiangsu Province 20,249 cases, Zhejiang Province 27,706 cases and Guangdong Province 157,363 cases, totaling 309,063cases. This constituted 64.15% of China's total case number and the greater part of the country's intellectual property caseload. The areas that experienced more than 50% year-on-year increase in caseload were Hebei Province (53.53%), Anhui Province (60.30%), Fujian Province (64.88%), Guangxi Autonomous Region (98.49%) and Chongqing Municipality (173.66%). Despite facing manpower shortages, the courts have managed to dispose of a large number of cases during the year, with the total disposal number reaching historic high. Other than being the most active regions, the courts in Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu Province, Zhejiang Province and Guangdong Province have also achieved commendable disposal rates of more than 90%. 案件数量再创新高。随着全社会知识产权保护意识的不断加强和知识产权司法保护公信力的稳步提升。2019年,人民法院新收和审结各类知识产权案件数量急剧增加,收、结案数量均创历史新高,增幅双双突破40%。从案件分布区域看,北京收案80165件、上海收案23580件、江苏收案20249件、浙江收案27706件、广东收案157363件,共计309063件,占全国法院知识产权收案数量64.15%,依然是知识产权诉讼纠纷较多的地区;从增长速度看,河北、安徽、福建、广西、重庆分别同比上升53.53%、60.30%、64.88%、98.49%、173.66%,涨幅均突破50%,其他地区亦呈现出明显的攀升趋势;从结案情况看,各级法院努力克服案多人少矛盾,结案数量大幅提升。以前述收案最多的地区为例,其结案率分别达到90%以上,圆满完成了审判任务。
Continued emergence of new case genres. As the new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation rapidly emerges, legal boundaries are increasing tested and pushed by new technologies, new products and new forms of business. New intellectual property issues involving cutting-edge technology relating to the Internet, big data, artificial intelligence, standard essential patents, biomedicine have also continued to emerge, requiring detailed examination of complex technological solutions and creative application of the law, based on the merits of each case. Some examples are: The Supreme People's Court: Heard patent cases involving mechanics, material science, electrical engineering, communications, biopharmaceuticals, and fine-tuned the adjudication rules base on the derived insights. Beijing Intellectual Property Court: Heard and concluded many significant and complex cases, including the first case relating to the infringement of cloud servers, and preservation of evidence during-trail for a case involving the infringement of a patent relating to the production of stable lyophilized pharmaceutical composition. Shanghai High People's Court: Concluded Nokiavs. Shanghai Huaqin Communication Technology Co., Ltd involving the infringement of a utility patent. The case provides reference for trying communications-related SEP disputes in the future. Guangdong Province: The courts have heard 63 patent cases, each involving a jurisdictional amount of more than CNY 10 million, the aggregate amount of which was approximately CNY 8.18billion. 新型案件不断增多。随着新一轮科技革命和产业变革的蓬勃兴起,新技术、新产品、新业态不断拓展法律边界,涉及互联网、大数据、人工智能、标准必要专利、生物医药等科技前沿领域的知识产权新问题不断涌现,既要对复杂的技术方案进行分析,又需要结合具体案情灵活适用法律。最高人民法院审理了涉及机械、材料、电学、通信、生物医药等领域的专利案件,进一步提炼有关裁判规则;北京知识产权法院审结“首例云服务器被诉侵权案”“冻干形式的稳定药用组合物专利侵权诉前行为保全案”等疑难复杂案件;上海市高级人民法院审结诺基亚公司与华勤通讯技术有限公司侵害发明专利权案,为通讯领域的标准必要专利案件的妥善审理提供了借鉴;广东法院专利案件诉讼标的额超过1000万元的案件有63件,标的总额约为81.8亿元。
Continued to augment protection. The courts have implemented the “Opinions on Improving the System of Property Rights Protection to Protect Property Rights According to Law” to provide more timely and accessible judicial relief for intellectual property disputes, as well as to balance the damages awarded with the market value of the intellectual property in question. Some exemplary efforts include: Beijing: The Haidian District People's Court awarded damages of more than CNY 20 million based on discretionary valuation when Motion Scene (which operates UC browser) sued Sogou for using its Sogou Input Method to redirect the user to Sogou's search website. Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region High People's Court: Increased the amount of damages from CNY 50,000 to CNY 1 million in the Guangdong Landai Group Beijing Lanbao Beer Co., Ltd vs. Henan Honghuo Food Co., Ltd et al. trademark infringement case to sanction infringers more severely. Zhejiang High People's Court: Ordered the respondent to pay CNY 8 million in damages for the Aupu Electrical Appliances (Hangzhou) Co., Ltd and Aopu Home Furnishing Co., Ltd vs. Zhejiang Fashion Building Materials Co., Ltd and Zhejiang New Energy Co., Ltd case involving trademark infringement and unfair competition. The court's decision has protected the “AOPU” brand value. Fujian Province: The courts imposed punitive damages in the “JIU MU WANG (lit. ‘King of Nine Herds')” trademark dispute and the “BOLIMO” trademark and unfair competition dispute when the damages awarded were either doubled or trebled the amount for compensatory damages. 保护力度持续加大。人民法院认真贯彻《关于完善产权保护制度依法保护产权的意见》,提高知识产权司法救济的及时性和便利性,努力实现侵权损害赔偿与知识产权市场价值的协调性和相称性。北京市海淀区人民法院在UC浏览器诉搜狗输入法流量劫持案中适用裁量性赔偿计算方式确定2000余万元的赔偿金额;内蒙古自治区高级人民法院在广东蓝带集团北京蓝宝酒业公司与河南红火公司等侵害商标权案中将赔偿数额由5万元提高到100万元,加大了对侵权源头的惩治力度;浙江省高级人民法院在杭州莫丽斯科技有限公司、奥普家居股份有限公司诉浙江风尚建材股份有限公司、浙江现代新能源公司侵害商标权及不正当竞争案中判令被告赔偿800万元,维护了“奥普”商标的品牌价值;福建法院在“九牧王”商标纠纷案和“博力谋”商标及不正当竞争案判决中积极采用惩罚性赔偿机制,将侵权损害赔偿金额提高了1倍和2倍。
Effects of judicial efforts were recognized. The courts have done well in a series of complex and novel cases that attracted considerable public attention. The precedence would serve as classic cases that are demonstrative and could guide future adjudication. Exemplary efforts include: SPC IP Court: Issued decision for its first case immediately after the hearing, and the determination criteria for functional features were detailed in the written judgement. The hearing was broadcasted live and was widely reported by the media. Live streaming of the hearing—a case that took only 50 days to conclude from the date it was accepted to service of judgement—attracted more than 18 million viewings. Opening up the courtroom for public scrutiny has ensured fairness, transparency and efficiency. Gansu High People's Court: Concluded a new plant variety dispute involving a foreign party, thereby protecting the lawful rights of the plant breeder. Shanghai Intellectual Property Court: Concluded a series of cases, which include the utility patent dispute between Neta Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd and Transcend China (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. The disputes, which involved cutting-edge technology used in mobile storage and a jurisdictional amount of more than CNY 24.7 million, has attracted widespread attention and much recognition. Hunan Province: Adjudicated trademark infringement and unfair competition cases involving a wide range of service sectors such as food and beverage, creative photography and department-store sales. The decisions provided direction for the regulated and reasonable use of trademark by players in the food & beverage, department store and creative industries, which in turn supported the healthy growth of the service sector. 司法效果日益彰显。人民法院在确保完成审判任务的同时,还审结了一批疑难、复杂、新类型及社会广泛关注的案件,发挥了典型案例的示范和指引作用。最高人民法院知识产权法庭敲响“第一槌”并当庭宣判,判决书深入阐释了功能性特征的认定标准,数十家媒体进行全媒体直播和广泛报道,庭审网络直播第一时间观看量达1800余万次,该案从立案、开庭到结案送达仅用50天,凸显公正透明高效。甘肃省高级人民法院审结的涉外植物新品种案件,保护了品种权人的合法权益。上海知识产权法院审理的深圳市朗科科技股份有限公司与创歆贸易(上海)有限公司等侵害发明专利权系列案,总标的达2470万元,涉案专利系移动存储领域的开创性技术,案件审理受到社会广泛关注和肯定。湖南法院审理了一批涉餐饮、创意摄影、百货销售等服务行业的商标侵权和不正当竞争案,引导餐饮行业、百货业、文创产业规范、正当使用商业标识,推动了第三产业良性健康发展。
Remarkable ADR outcomes. The courts have continued to turn to non-litigious alternative dispute resolution as the primary means to settle dispute, and on promoting the new era Fengqiao Experience—a way of community-level social governance whereby public effort was harnessed to maintain social stability. By actively encouraging the broad use of ADR, parties were encouraged to resolve disputes through non-litigious means by working together to find mutually agreeable and beneficial ways to settle intellectual property disputes efficiently. Exemplary efforts include: The Supreme People's Court: Successfully mediated the trademark infringement case of Henan Dukang Investment Group vs. Shaanxi Baishui Dukang Company, and permanently resolved all cases relating to the “DUKANG” (believed to be a minister under the mythological Yellow Emperor and originator of winemaking) trademark issue. The court's efforts have contributed to improving the stability of the local market and providing protecting local businesses. It established a nation-wide whole-of-system coordinating mechanism to explore a circuit adjudication model combining the workings of an IP court and a circuit court, and an adjudication mechanism combining onsite examination (kanyan) and hearing, and has since facilitated the unified settlement of 48 related cases nationwide. It also enabled the efficient resolution of 80 patent infringement cases at the pre-trial stage. The court's efforts have made litigation easier and enabled the Fengqiao Experience to enrich the intellectual property sector. Beijing: Continued to drive reform of the “ADR + expedited procedure” as part of the city's effort to modernize the capital city's social governance system and governance approach. Jilin Province: The courts focused on using mediation to resolve disputes. Total mediation rate for intellectual property disputes was 75%. Anhui High People's Court: Succeeded in mediating the dispute between China Broadcasting Satellite TV and China Telecom Anhui Branch concerning the infringement of broadcasting right, with a jurisdictional amount exceeding CNY 100 million. Shandong Province: The courts implemented the “Regulations to Promote Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution for Shandong Province” and worked at developing a platform to align litigation with mediation. Hubei Province: The courts coordinated resources and established mediation platforms comprising administrative organs, lessors of the site where infringement occurred, industry associations, attorney-mediation organizations to facilitate mediated settlement of disputes. Sichuan Province: The courts entered into a cooperation agreement with the China (Sichuan) Intellectual Property Protection Centre to develop a mechanism to provide coordinated protection of intellectual property. Under the agreement, the center was appointed to mediate intellectual property-related disputes. Yunnan Province: The courts established a pre-trial mediation system for intellectual property cases to enable the prompt resolution of a certain proportion of intellectual property disputes. Liaoning Province: The courts beefed up existing ADR mechanism by using pre-trial mediation for copyright, trademark, and unfair competition cases if the facts are clear and minimally disputed. The mechanism has enabled the courts to align litigation with mediation. Xinjiang Autonomous Region: The courts focused on using mediation to settle dispute, translating to a rather high percentage of post-mediation withdrawal rate.
......
 多元解纷成效突出。人民法院坚持把非诉讼纠纷解决机制挺在前面,坚持和发展新时代“枫桥经验”,推进多元解纷体系建设,鼓励当事人通过非诉讼方式化解纠纷,促使各类纠纷解决方式各得其所、各尽其能、多元共治、形成合力,进一步提升了知识产权纠纷解决效率。最高人民法院成功调解陕西白水杜康酒业有限责任公司与洛阳杜康控股有限公司侵害商标权案,一揽子解决了涉“杜康”的所有案件,为地方稳定、企业发展提供了司法保障;最高人民法院建立全国法院统筹联动整体机制,探索“知产法庭+巡回法庭”巡回审理模式及“勘验+庭审”案件审理机制,推动全国48个关联案件一揽子化解,庭前跨区域高效化解80个专利侵权案件,方便群众诉讼,丰富了知识产权领域的“枫桥经验”;北京法院持续推进立案阶段“多元调解+速裁”机制改革,努力推动首都社会治理体系和治理能力现代化;吉林法院注重发挥调解作用,各类知识产权纠纷调解率达75%;安徽省高级人民法院成功调解标的额逾1亿元的中广影视卫星公司与中国电信安徽分公司侵害广播组织权案;山东法院认真落实《山东省多元化解纠纷促进条例》,积极构建化解知识产权纠纷诉调对接平台;湖北法院搭建行政机关、侵权场地租赁方、行业协会、律师调解组织等第三方参与的调解平台,通过协调各方资源,促使达成调解;四川法院与中国(四川)知识产权保护中心签订关于建立知识产权协同保护机制的合作协议,委托其进行涉专利知识产权案件的调解工作;云南法院积极建立知识产权诉前调解制度,为实现部分知识产权案件及时化解创造条件;辽宁法院进一步完善多元化纠纷解决机制,针对事实清楚、争议不大的著作权、商标权、不正当竞争等纠纷案件采取诉前调解,实行诉调对接;新疆法院注重采用多种调解方式化解矛盾,调撤率始终保持相对较高水平。
......

Dear visitor, you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases. If you are not a subscriber, you can pay for a document through Online Pay and read it immediately after payment.
An entity user can apply for a trial account or contact us for your purchase.
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com

 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容;
单位用户可申请试用或者来电咨询购买。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:database@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese