Patent Administrative Law Enforcement Measures of China was
amended recently and was implemented on July 1, 2015.
The amended Measures enhances the function and power of local
intellectual property offices against patent infringement and
patent counterfeiting, especially in exhibition and e-business
field, which involve more and more patent disputes nowadays.
For example, the amended Measures prescribes that a local
intellectual property office may order the exhibitor of infringing
or counterfeit products to immediately retreat exhibits from the
exhibition, destroy or seal related propaganda materials, and
change or cover the display boards etc. Once a local intellectual
property office found patent infringement or patent counterfeiting
on any e-commerce platform, it shall inform the provider of the
e-business platform and ask them to delete or disconnect the
The amended Measures improves the proceedings in actions taken
by a local intellectual property office, such as shortening the
duration of investigation for patent infringement disputes from 4
months to 3 months with a 1-month extension at most for complicated
cases, defining a definite deadline of 5 or 10 working days for
file opening for complaints against patent counterfeiting, making
it publicly available within 20 working days after administrative
decisions on patent infringement or patent counterfeiting.
In China, patent owners may take administrative proceedings
against patent infringement or patent counterfeiting. Different
from judicial proceedings, patent administrative proceedings are
recommended when a simplified, cheap and quick action is preferred
against patent infringement or patent counterfeiting. The
amendments to the Measures reflect the consistent policy of the
government, that is, to strengthen patent protection more
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 Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
This article enunciates the recent, much awaited, and landmark judgment delivered on September 16, 2016 by Hon'ble Delhi High Court throwing light on the important provisions of the Copyright Act, 1962.
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion recently issued an office memorandum pursuant to receiving representations from various stakeholders for guidance with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957.
An Invention Disclosure Form is the documentation of the invention. This is a means to document particulars of your invention and submitting it to the patent attorney who is filing your patent application.
The Patents Act 1970, along with the Patents Rules 1972, came into force on 20th April 1972, replacing the Indian Patents and Designs Act 1911. The Patents Act was largely based on the recommendations of the Ayyangar Committee Report headed by Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar. One of the recommendations was the allowance of only process patents with regard to inventions relating to drugs, medicines, food and chemicals.
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”
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).