China: Recent Court Decisions

In China, industrial design is governed by the patent law. The design patent system is popular in China mainly because a patent right can be granted quickly and at a relatively low cost, as design patents are not subjected to substantive examination. In 2011, over 522,000 applications for design patents were filed in China. That amounts to about one third of the total filings for all three types of invention-creations (i.e. inventions, utility models, and designs). At the same time, infringement and other contentious matters based on design patents are also on the rise, as people are increasingly using the court and administrative system to resolve their disputes. Accordingly, court proceedings in connection with design patents are becoming more numerous, including both patent infringement cases and administrative appeal actions challenging invalidation decisions made by the Patent Re-examination Board (PRB) of the State Intellectual Property Office. We will discuss some of the recently reported decisions to help give readers a better idea of recent developments in the Chinese design patent system.

1. Fen WU v. Zhejiang Wanfeng Ceramics

The decision on the infringing activity in Fen WU v. Zhejiang Wanfeng Ceramics was recently issued by the Higher People's Court of Guangdong Province.In this case, the design at issue relates to a set of stackable cups. As can be seen from the pictures below, the patented design and the alleged infringing design are identical in shape, while the alleged infringing design also includes pattern and color.

Patented Design Alleged Infringing Design

According to the Chinese Patent Law, "the extent of protection of the patent right for design shall be determined by the design of the product as shown in the drawings or photographs". This means that all the elements of the design shall be considered when its scope of protection is determined. As can be seen from the above pictures, the alleged infringing design is obtained by adding pattern and color to the patented design. Although the difference in the overall visual effect of the two designs is remarkable, it would obviously be unfair to the patent owner and undermine the spirit and effectiveness of patent law if the defendant could escape liability by making such simple modifications to the patented design.

In order to properly apply the patent law and clarify how patent infringement should be determined, the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases" was released on December 28, 2009. Article 11 of the Interpretation confirms that "when determining whether designs are identical or similar, the people's court shall consider [...] the overall visual effect of the design to make a comprehensive judgment", and also emphasizes that "the overall visual effect of a design is usually more affected by technical features of a patented design which are distinct from those of the existing designs (i.e. "point of novelty") as opposed to other design features of the patented design".

The Supreme People's Court places heavy emphasis on the "point of novelty" because industrial design in the sense of patent law is regarded as intellectual property of an innovative type, and what is entitled to patent protection is the "design scheme" of the product, which may consist of several design features. Unless authorized by the patentee, others are prohibited by patent law from exploiting identical or similar design schemes for commercial purposes. For this reason, a patent is infringed if the alleged infringing product as a whole misappropriates (reproduces or imitates) the design scheme of the patent.

In this lawsuit, it was determined that the shape of the product should be preferentially considered in judging patent infringement because the design patent does not claim color protection and contains no pattern, and a regular consumer, based on his knowledge and cognitive ability, would realize with no doubt that the alleged infringing design misappropriated the design scheme, especially the shape (being one of the three basic elements of a design, the shape of a product is to some extent independent from the pattern and color of the product), of the patented design when the two designs are observed as a whole. Therefore, the court determined that the two designs are similar to each other and the defendant is liable for patent infringement.

As discussed above, the infringing design was obtained by making modifications and improvements on the patented design. Although the exploitation of the patented design is barred by the design patent, it is theoretically possible for the infringing design to apply for a patent and obtain protection, for example based the pattern and/or color of the design.

2. Kewan Ltd. v. the PRB

This administrative appeal case was finally decided by the Supreme People's Court in December of 2008. The facts of this case are as follows: on August 6, 2002, Kewan applied for five design patents entitled "Dyeing Machine (J, K, L, M, N)" before the Chinese Patent Office. The five designs are similar but not identical. The patents issued on these designs were later revoked by the PRB in accordance with Paragraph one, Rule 13 of the 2001 edition of the Implementing Regulations of the Chinese Patent Law, which provides that "for any identical invention-creation, only one patent right shall be granted".

The issue of this case was how "identical invention-creation (identical design)" should be defined. The first-instance court upheld the invalidation decision of the PRB and elucidated in its ruling that "identical design" includes situations where two or more designs are either identical or similar. The second-instance court overturned the lower court's decision and concluded that for two or more patent applications filed by the same entity on the same day, "identical design" should not cover the situation where the two or more designs are similar. The Supreme People's Court decided to hear this case and found that under the then current legal framework, "identical design" should include situations where two or more designs are either identical or similar, regardless of who the applicant is. The invalidation decision of the PRB was eventually maintained.

The decision issued in Kewan Ltd. v. the PRB triggered many discussions in the profession and general public. Since it is common for applicants to develop a series of similar designs for the same product at the same time and put them into the market, law makers and practitioners realized that there is a need to establish a mechanism to protect these similar designs. Highly influenced by this case, in the 2009 edition of the Chinese Patent Law, Article 31 was amended to allow "two or more similar designs for the same product" to be filed as one application. This case is just one example of how decisions made in such cases have tremendous impact on legislation.

3.Honda v. the PRB

4.Wanfeng Motorcycle Wheel Ltd. v. the PRB

There are many similarities between these two cases. They are both administrative appeal cases concerning design patents and they were both heard by the Supreme People's Court in 2010. More importantly, they both raised the question as to how the judgment of identity or similarity between two designs is affected by the "degree of freedom" in creating the design. Despite the similarities between these two cases, their outcomes were very different: the court reversed the invalidation decision in Honda v. the PRB but sustained the invalidation decision in Wanfeng Motorcycle Wheel Ltd. v. the PRB.

By analyzing these two cases together, one can see that the "degree of freedom" is influential on the similarity judgment and affected by the following factors: limitations on the function of the product, limitations on the manufacturing process, difficulties in creating the design, and state of the prior designs.

In addition to addressing the "degree of freedom" issue, the decision of Honda v. the PRB also specified the basic principle of "holistic observation and comprehensive determination". More specifically, the expression "holistic observation" is not equivalent to "approximate observation" or "observation of contour". Instead, it means that all elements in a design should be considered. The judgment should be a comprehensive determination based on the observation.

5. Yingde WEI v. the PRB

Yingde brought an administrative lawsuit against the PRB before the Beijing Intermediate People's Court after receiving an invalidation decision from the PRB declaring Yingde's design patent invalid in view of the disclosures in a Chinese utility model patent. As shown in the below table, Figs. 18A and 18B of the utility model patent displayed a floating member 72 used in an infusion device, the floating member comprising a cylindrical body and two bosses 723 formed at the opposite ends surrounding the body. In addition, the written description of the utility model mentions that "six bosses may be symmetrically provided at the periphery of the cylindrical body of the floating member". The court confirmed the PRB's decision and held that the drawings in the utility model patent, together with the text in the description thereof, have disclosed a design that is similar to the patented design. It can be concluded from this case that not only drawings or photographs but also a written description of a technical solution can depict the content of a design.

6.Gaohua ZHANG v. the PRB

The subject matter of this administrative lawsuit is actually not a design patent, but a Chinese utility model patent. However, a design patent was cited by the PRB as a "prior art" against the inventiveness of a claim in the subject utility model patent, which directs to a wall-mounted fold out chair. In this case, the court ruled that based on the drawings (shown below) of the design patent, a person skilled in the art cannot determine directly and unambiguously that "grooves are provided on the wall fixture" and "one end of each supporting rod is connected with the wall fixture by being inserted into the grooves, the upper surface of which braces the supporting rods", as recited in the utility model claim. The court therefore overturned the PRB's decision.

Prior art (a published design)

Based on the decision in this case, it seems that, at least in theory, a design can be cited as "prior art" against a utility model or even an invention patent. In other words, a technical solution can be disclosed by drawings or photographs without any description. However, according to the decision, the contents of disclosure of a design only include the technical features which can be derived directly and unambiguously from the drawings or photographs of the design, but not contents inferred therefrom.

Other notable decisions

In many recently reported decisions, such as Ping CHEN v. the PRB, Foshan Nanhai Carlos Integrated Electrics Ltd. v. the PRB, and Guangdong Zhenghan Pharmacy Ltd. v. the PRB, the long recognized principle that "the presence of a minute and partial difference between two designs will not have a substantial influence on the overall visual effect of the designs" is confirmed. However, in Jinhua Yahu Tools Ltd. v. the PRB, the aforementioned principle was proven to not always be true. In the decision of this case, the court held that "the change in the shape of the upper part of the handles of the telescopic rods in a foldable cart only creates a minute and partial difference in the overall appearance. However, as this part is very easily observed and noticed by consumers when the cart is in use, it should not be concluded that said difference has no substantial influence on the overall visual effect of the design".

Qingsong ZENG v. the PRB case is also notable because in this case the Beijing Intermediate People's Court confirmed in its decision that "an evidence showing the existence and effectiveness of a prior right is sufficient to satisfy Paragraph three, Rule 66 of the Implementing Regulations of the Chinese Patent Law, which requires submission of evidence showing conflicts between the patent right at issue and the prior right". That is to say that the party requesting for patent invalidation only needs to demonstrate the existence and effectiveness of a prior right and is free from the responsibility of proving the conflicts.

Although the patent law is still a relatively new concept in China, with a history of less than 30 years, the Chinese people are embracing the concept and actively participating in the system, as can be seen from the increased amount of patent filings and court proceedings. Industrial designs are a very active part of the Chinese patent system. Although China does not have a case law system and the above-mentioned decisions are not binding, these decisions may be of great influence and value as reference for future cases. The decisions made in these cases may also lead to amendments of relevant laws and regulations.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.