Overview

  1. SIPO published the "Notice on the extension of the period for annuity reduction to the first six years as of the grant of patent right"
  2. China’s State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) published the “Opinions on promoting the development of music industry” on its official website.
  3. China IP Report 2015 was published on December 1, with Beijing ranking the first for 6 consecutive years.
  4. “The opinions on speeding up the building of IP great power under the new setting” signed and approved by Premier Keqiang Li and printed and distributed by the State Council put forward that China aims to achieve major accomplishment on important and key areas of IP reform by 2020.
  5. Notice of the Higher People's Court of Beijing Municipality on Issuing “the Provisions on Several Issues concerning the Jurisdiction in Civil Procedures (for Trial Implementation)” and “the Measures for the Handling of Filing of Complaint by Post (for Trial Implementation)”.
  6. On January 14, SIPO publishes the Statistics on Invention Patent Granting in China for 2015

"Notice on the extension of the period for annuity reduction to the first six years as of the grant of patent right"

SIPO published the "Notice on the extension of the period for annuity reduction to the first six years as of the grant of patent right", which will be enforced as of January, 1, 2016.

  1. For a patent within the 1st to 3rd year of its granting on January 1, 2016, and whose application for annuity reduction has been approved by the Patent Office, annuity reduction for the 4th-6th year will be enjoyed automatically without having to reapply.
  2. For a patent within the 4th to 5th year of its granting on January 1, 2016, and whose application for annuity reduction has been approved by the Patent Office, annuity reduction for the next year to the 6th year will be enjoyed automatically without having to reapply.
  3. For a patent at the 6th year of its granting on January 1, 2016, annuity for the 4th-6th year shall be paid in full.

On December 1, China’s State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) published the “Opinions on promoting the development of music industry” on its official website.

The "Opinions" sets out to push the 3rd revision on “Copyright Law”, seeking to promote the orderly development of musical industry, especially digital music, through copyright protection. Measures include: tough punishment for copyright infringing activities such as spreading music without permission; support copyright cooperation between right owners and users, promote mutual authorization and extensive spread, encourage related organizations explore business models in the context of network communication, push the establishment of a copyright-ordered web music environment and ecosystem; improve the rewarding system for reporting and cracking down for anti-pirate reporting purposes, impose tougher sanction against infringing activities including illegal spread, producing and publishing of works by passing off as the original publisher; and strengthen market supervision in banning musical works with harmful content.

The “Opinions” aims to regulate the entire musical chain and bring forth a number of classical works, innovative companies and talents of major influence during the period of China’s 13th Five Year Plan, and hopes to build the industry into a 300 billion business by the end of this period. 

China IP Index Research Group published China IP Report 2015 on December 1

There is a close relationship between the IP development level and the economic level of the region. Beijing has ranked first for 6 years in a row. The top 10 provinces on list of China’s regional IP Index are: Beijing, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Guangdong, Zhejiang, Tianjin, Shandong, Fujian, Chongqing and Anhui. The following 11 provinces are: Liaoning, Hunan, Shaanxi, Hubei, Sichuan, Henan, Guangxi, Shanxi, Heilongjiang, Hainan and Hebei. The last 10 provinces are: Jiangxi, Jilin, Guizhou, Ningxia, Yunnan, Inner Mongolia, Tibet, Gansu, Xinjiang and Qinghai.

“The opinions on speeding up the building of IP great power under the new setting” signed and approved by Premier Keqiang Li on December 22.

The Opinions puts forward 4 basic principles: insisting on the strategic guidance, insisting on reform and innovation, insisting on market-orient systems, insisting on overall planning and all-round consideration.

The Opinions raises five major measures: push the structural reform of IP management system; employ rigid IP protection; promote the application of IP rights; enhance oversea planning and risk prevention and control for key industries; and improve the out-bound IP cooperation.

The Opinions demands that: authorize local government to perform IP reform, encouraging regions meeting all requirements to launch piloting reform programs on IP integrated management; introduce IP appraisal systems for major economic activities; push the reform of patent licensing systems; realizing online registration, e-application and paperless examination and approval for IP rights and speeding up the construction of a world class patent examination organizations.

The Opinions raises: impose tougher punishment against IP infringing activities; complement the advantages of administrative and judicial enforcement; recording companies and individuals that deliberately infringe IP rights into a credit reporting system so as to create a business environment of fair competition and supervision.

The Opinions confirms: carry out more study on IP protection in areas such as internet, e-commerce, big data and so on; push the improvement of related laws and regulations; formulate and improve a patent protection policy featured by public participation in innovation, contracting, supporting and funding.

The Opinions raises: enhance foreign cooperation by expending public diplomacy; enhance oversea planning and risk prevention and control for key industries and deeper Chinese industries’’ integration into global industry chain, value chain and innovation chain.

The Opinions also raises: establish an innovation driving development evaluation system. Gradually include IP products into national economic accounting system; the encouragement of invention and innovation as well as IP protection will be taken into consideration in the comprehensive evaluation of government officials.

On December 31, 2015 Beijing High People’s Court printed and distributed the two notices: "Provisions on matters concerning court jurisdiction for civil cases (trial)" and “The procedure for case filing through mailing (trial)”

Scope of application: Beijing First, Second, Third, and Forth Intermediate People’s Courts; People’s courts of all districts and counties, and Beijing Rail Transportation Court.

Key contents of Measures for the Handling of Filing of Complaint by Post (for Trial Implementation)

  1. For complaint by post, complaint materials do not have to be original, but the parity’s contact information and receiving address must be provided. (Article 2)
  2. Where a party posts complaint materials to a court, it will be deemed that the party has filed a lawsuit before the court from the date when the mail is posted. (Article 3)
  3. For materials that are complete and meet the requirements of case filling, the court shall notify the party concerned of the examination result, and inform the party to come to the court for identity verification and go through filling formalities. (Article 6) For materials that are incomplete or need amendments, the court shall notify the party once and only about what are needed to be amended before which time and date and the consequence of noncompliance within the said due period. (Article 7) For unqualified case fillings, the party shall be informed of non-acceptance or rejection as well as the reasons for same. If the party insists on filling the case or asks the court to issue the ruling of non-acceptance or rejection, the party shall be informed to go to the court for identity verification, and the court shall issue ruling of non-acceptance or rejection. (Article 8)

Key articles of Provisions on Several Issues concerning the Jurisdiction in Civil Procedures (for Trial Implementation)

Article 1 “Where the contract agrees on the execution place, the execution place shall be the place as agreed upon in the contract” in paragraph 1, article 18 of the “Interpretation On Civil Procedures”, the execution place as agreed upon only refers to the circumstances where the contract states clearly “the execution place of the contract”, whereas the place of delivery or payment stipulated in the contract shall not be used as grounds for determine the execution place of the contract.


Article 2 The “disputed object” in paragraph 2, article 18 of the “Interpretation on Civil Procedures” refers to the contractual obligations pointed out by the litigation claim, the execution place of the disputed object refers to the execution place of the contract rights pointed out by the litigation claim.

Article 3 The provision “Where the contract does not appoint or vaguely appoints the execution place and where the disputed object is monetary payment, the place of the monetary receiving party is deemed as the execution place of the contract” in paragraph 2, article 18 of the “Interpretation On Civil Procedures” applies to all disputes where the disputed object is monetary payment, except laws, regulations or judicial interpretations provides otherwise.

Where litigation claim asks for payment of penalty or indemnify for a loss, it is regarded that party concerned requires the opposite party to execute its liability for breach of contract in accordance with the obligations of the contract; therefore, the jurisdiction shall be determined in accordance with the execution place of the contract obligation of the breached liability.

Article 4 “the place where the monetary receiving party resides” and “the place where the party performing the obligation resides” in paragraph 2, article 18 of the “Interpretation On Civil Procedures” refers to the place of residence of monetary receiving party and duty-performing party respectively.

Article 5 Where a party concerned asks to change, remove, terminate contract or to confirm the validity of contract, if the contract does not appoints the execution place, and if the contract does not fall into special circumstances where the execution place shall be determined otherwise as stipulated by laws, regulations or judicial interpretations, the jurisdiction shall be determined in accordance with the defendant’s place of residence.

Article 6 Where parties agree to address disputes by applying for arbitration before an arbitral institution or filling lawsuit before a court, the arbitration agreement is deemed as invalid, but this will not affect the validity of litigation jurisdiction agreement. If the litigation jurisdiction agreement complies with laws and does not violate provisions on jurisdiction by level and exclusive jurisdiction, it shall be deemed as valid.

Article 12 In the articles of the jurisdiction agreement, where the territorial jurisdiction is specified but the jurisdiction by level does not conform to local standard in this regard, if the court with jurisdiction could be determined based on the agreement on the jurisdiction in the place concerned and by considering the nature of the case, the amount of the object, the articles of the jurisdiction agreement is valid.

Article 13 If the jurisdiction agreement appoints the court where one party resides as the court of jurisdiction, the court shall accept the case if the party concerned file a lawsuit based on the information stated in the contract such as the place of residence, residential address, or contact address.

Article 14 For court’s ruling of transfer of jurisdiction made in accordance with its statutory purview, the party concerned shall not institute an appeal.

Article 15 Where the value of the object is difficult to determine when filling the lawsuit, the jurisdiction of level shall be determined in accordance with the party’s proposed amount of the object. Where in the course of case hearing, if the amount of the object is determined by the evaluation procedures as going beyond the jurisdiction of the appellate court, the case shall be transferred to another court with legal jurisdiction for hearing.

Article 24 Case filing chamber of Beijing High People’s Court is responsible for the interpretation of this provision.

Click here to view table.