"Slow Justice is No Justice": Brits and Chinese get on just fine
There has been plenty of coverage of the UK IPO/FCO-led China-UK Intellectual Property Week, with even the BBC's Today radio show picking it up [this Kat missed it, and his search engine of choice isn't being very helpful]. Put together by Britain’s multi-tasking China IP attaché Tom Duke, the visit took in eight cities in five days, spreading the word for and about IP in the UK. It has been equally well received in China, with meetings on the margins at a high level and TV coverage on their national broadcaster, CCTV. But what did our reporters on the ground think? Participants and Katfriends Gwilym Roberts (CIPA, Kilburn & Strode) and Catherine Wolfe (ITMA, Boult Wade Tennant) share their thoughts:
 |
| Next to claim-drafting, this is a doddle ... |
"What a week in China, with around the clock efforts from
government, judiciary and the private sector.
Baroness Neville-Rolfe, just a month into her ministry, set the pace,
opening the day 1 Symposium in Beijing, signing a number of accords and
fielding questions across the spectrum (Copyright Prosecution Highway,
anyone?). Sir Colin Birss was also on
typically good form, spreading the word on enforcement best practice both
publicly and in a series of meetings across China with local judges. And the pace didn’t slow in the evenings either, downtime
being occupied with a range of social events aimed at building that essential
element of success in China, relationships or “Guanxi”, including a memorable
cultural event involving, aptly, plate spinners (and we don’t mean Tom).
 |
| Machine for enhancing evidence collection |
The delegation included both CIPA and ITMA representatives,
presenting a united front with the IPO.
CIPA and ITMA have had the opportunity to promote the UK and European
systems abroad, and learn as they go; there has been much talk, for example, of GDP,
national statistics and state-run innovation initiatives – and that’s just from the IPO. As ever, the system in China is
under review and reform, with discussion of punitive damages and enhanced
evidence collection, which will please UK plc, and in response to a query from well-known
attorney Lena Shen of Sanyou, one particularly poetic comment was made by SIPO
during the Symposium at a very practical level: “Slow Justice is No Justice”.
A hot topic is the controversy over suggested revisions to
employee compensation law for patents.
The proposed system would be heavily employee-biased and is causing
concern to companies with R&D interests in China; the employee would be
permitted to access sensitive financial information to establish if the
contractual rewards for an invention were enough and, if they were not, would be able to
sue for the statutory compensation which is “even better than Germany”. Nothing is settled yet but, if you are adversely affected by this proposed system and haven’t
lobbied yet, you might consider it prudent to start doing so now.
On the trade mark front, the IPO and ITMA had an all-day
joint workshop at the SAIC, with very constructive and open dialogue. We were able to discuss the unexpected and
unwelcome new requirement for a company certificate when filing TM
applications. The ITMA team also
discussed “bad faith” / “unexpected entrepreneurial” applications, diligently pressed the case for the excellence
of the IPO's opposition model and continued the long-stage campaign to
introduce a counter-statement system in oppositions, especially in cases where
copyright or personal names are involved.
 |
| Hot Pot table-top topic |
The trade mission then starburst from its Beijing base, with
visits to Nanjing and Suzhou (patents and TMs), Shanghai (commerce and keynote
at the MIP forum by the Minister), Guangzhou (judge’s visit), Hangzhou
(e-commerce) and Chongqing (copyright and Hotpot Dinner) and we’ll report on
those separately in a later post. A lot has been done in
a short time and we hope that the effort is already transforming into achievement;
at the very least the delegation will come home having generated more than
enough interest to keep those plates spinning for a good while to come.
Thanks, Gwilym and Catherine, says the IPKat. We look forward to Part Two of this fascinating travelogue ...
Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our
Policies section.
If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.
Comments
Post a Comment
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html