China Gets Tough on IP Rights Infringement

(4) The acceleration of intellectual property related legislative and judicial reform. With the implementation of laws such as the Trademark Law, Patent Law and Copyright Law, an IP judicial protection regime and mechanism with judicial protection at its core, civil adjudication as its foundation and with the parallel development of administrative adjudication and criminal adjudication has progressively been established.

(5) Governments at each level have given further rein to their macroeconomic control functions by guiding and controlling the flow of private funds into the knowledge economy, strengthening government fiscal support and formulating preferential tax policies.

2 . HOW DO YOU THINK THE E-COMMERCE LAW WILL CHANGE THE LANDSCAPE OF IP LITIGATION?

Article 42 of the E-commerce Law provides differently from past judicial practice in terms of the precondition for “notify-delete”. In past judicial practice, after an e-commerce platform operator received notice of intellectual property infringement, it was under an obligation to block such act only if there was a strong possibility that such act constituted infringement. The literal meaning of Article 42 of the E-commerce Law does not specify that a blocking action is to be taken only when there is a strong possibility of infringement, i.e. once an e-commerce platform operator receives notice of intellectual property infringement, so long as the notice includes preliminary evidence that infringement is constituted, the e-commerce platform operator has the obligation to block such act, even if the possibility of the infringement specified in the notice is relatively weak. After a platform merchant receives the forwarded notice, it may submit a declaration to the e-commerce platform operator to the effect that there is no infringement. Such declaration is required to include preliminary evidence that there is no infringement. Once it has received the declaration, the e-commerce platform operator is required to forward the notice to the intellectual property rights holder that sent the notice and inform him that he can lodge a complaint with the relevant competent authority or institute a legal action in the people's court. If the e-commerce platform operator does not receive notice that the intellectual property rights holder has lodged a complaint or instituted a legal action within 15 days after the forwarded declaration reaches the rights holder, it is required to promptly halt the measure it has taken. The provisions of this article will, on the one hand, make it easier for intellectual property rights holders to exercise their rights, but, on the other hand, will result in the interests of e-commerce platform operators and platform merchants being materially affected by the abuse by intellectual property rights holders of their rights. This article will lead to frequent disputes involving intellectual property rights litigants, e-commerce platform operators and platform merchants.

With the rapid development of e-commerce, bad faith complaints against merchants on e-commerce platforms have become more and more common, and therefore seriously affecting the normal operations of e-commerce platforms. The third paragraph of Article 42 of the E-commerce Law specifies that if an intellectual property rights holder gives notice to an e-commerce platform in bad faith claiming that there is intellectual property infringement on the platform, thereby causing the e-commerce platform operator to incur a loss, the rights holder is liable for twice the usual compensation. This provision represents that, for the first time, China, at the legislative level, has established a punitive compensation system for the issuance of a notice to an e-commerce platform in bad faith. Although this punitive compensation system will have an active effect on halting complaints lodged in bad faith and promoting the healthy development of e-commerce platforms, it is otherwise further provided in Article 84 of the same law that if a platform merchant commits an infringement of intellectual property rights and the e-commerce platform fails to take the necessary measures in accordance with the law, it may be liable for a fine of up to Rmb2 million. All of the abovementioned provisions will affect the determination of the measure of damages in disputes between intellectual property rights holders and e-commerce platform operators/platform merchants in intellectual property legal actions.

3 . DO YOU THINK THE E-COMMERCE LAW WHEN IMPLEMENTED WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT COUNTERFEIT SELLERS? WHO WOULD MOST LIKELY HURT–E-COMMERCE PLATFORM PROVIDERS OR ONLINE MERCHANTS?

At present, counterfeit products are mainly concentrated among platform merchants, a majority of which include natural person operators, online-merchants and the overseas personal shopper sector. Article 9 of the E-commerce Law specifies that, “for the purposes of this Law, the term 'e-commerce operator' means a natural person, legal person or non-legal person organization that engages in the business activity of selling merchandise or offering services through an information network such as the internet, and includes e-commerce platform operators, platform merchants and e-commerce operators that sell merchandise or offer services through their own website or other online services”. This provision indicates that e-commerce operators, including organizations both with and without legal personality, include e-commerce platform operators and natural person platform merchants. Thus, online merchants and overseas personal shoppers are bound by the E-commerce Law.

Articles 10 and 12 of the E-commerce Law specify that an e-commerce operator may engage in business activities only if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) it carries out business registration in accordance with the law and has a business license, save for individuals who sell agricultural byproducts produced by themselves or homemade handicraft products, or individuals who use their own skills to engage in service activities for people without requiring, in accordance with the law, a permit or occasional small-scale trading activities or where registration is not required in accordance with laws or administrative regulations; (2) it must pay taxes in accordance with the law; and (3) if it sells foodstuffs, it is additionally required to apply for a food distribution permit. Particular attention should be paid to the fact that an e-commerce operator, in addition to carrying out registration and the procedures for a business license in accordance with the law, is required to continuously display the same in a prominent location, and failing which it may be fined up to Rmb10,000. This signifies that if a consumer purchases a poor quality or counterfeit product from an e-commerce operator, he has the grounds and the basis to safeguard his rights. However, for e-commerce operators, the extent of information disclosure has increased, oversight has intensified and payment of taxes will increase costs, thereby eliminating their price advantages.

Article 17 of the E-commerce Law specifies that, “an e-commerce operator shall comprehensively, truthfully, accurately and timely disclose information on his or its merchandise or services so as to ensure consumers' right to information and right to choose. An e-commerce operator may not engage in fraudulent or misleading commercial publicity through means such as fake transactions and fabricated user comments to defraud or mislead consumers.” Article 39 specifies that, “an e-commerce platform operator shall establish and improve a trustworthiness assessment system, post its trustworthiness assessment rules and provide consumers means to comment on the merchandise sold and the services offered on its platform. An e-commerce platform operator may not delete comments made by consumers on the merchandise sold or the services offered on its platform.” In the event of a violation of the foregoing provisions, the market regulator will order rectification within a specified period of time and may impose a fine of not less than Rmb20,000 and not more than Rmb100,000; if the circumstances are serious, it will impose a fine of not less than Rmb100,000 and not more than Rmb500,000.

This article's provisions prohibit e-commerce platforms from “artificially creating good reviews” or “deleting negative comments”, failing which a fine of up to Rmb500,000 may be imposed. Many people, when buying online, are in the habit of reading others' comments. Before the legislation, the fabrication of user comments by e-commerce operators through means such as “artificially created good reviews” and “deletion of negative comments” resulted in certain merchandise seemingly having good reviews, and thus inducing consumers to buy it. Such behavior is expressly prohibited by the E-commerce Law and the law also increases e-commerce platform operators' oversight responsibilities. Consumers' rights and interests will be better ensured, the reliance by sellers of counterfeit products on the provision of fake transaction comment information is prohibited by law. Such sellers will face a real market competition environment and product operating methods that do not rely on quality to succeed will ultimately be eliminated by the market.

Article 38 of the E-commerce Law specifies that, “if an e-commerce platform operator knows or ought to have known that the merchandise sold or services offered by a platform merchant do not satisfy the requirements for ensuring the safety of the person or property or otherwise infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of consumers and fails to take necessary measures against the same, it shall, in accordance with the law, bear joint and several liability with the platform merchant.” Article 45 specifies that, “if an e-commerce platform operator knows or ought to have known that a platform merchant has infringed upon intellectual property rights, it shall take necessary measures such as deletion, masking, severing of the links or terminating the trading and services. If it fails to take such measures, it shall bear joint and several liability with the infringer.” The provisions of these two articles signify that if there is a problem in the merchandise of a seller on a platform, the platform is also liable and could face a fine of up to Rmb2 million. For e-commerce platforms, these articles make the burden of their oversight responsibilities heavier. To ensure compliance, internet enterprises will adopt administrative rules and user agreements that are stricter than the policies and laws, and as oversight becomes ever more stringent, the probability that consumers will buy counterfeit or poor quality merchandise will also be reduced.

In short, once the E-commerce Law is implemented, e-commerce operators, whether e-commerce platform providers or e-commerce operators (overseas personal shoppers and online merchants), will be subject to stricter oversight and will be required to pay taxes in accordance with the law, and this will result in the reining in and rectifying of various irregularities on e-commerce platforms, making consumers the ultimate beneficiaries. As they buy online, they will be accorded better and greater protection.

4 . WHAT IS YOUR ADVICE FOR FOREIGN BRAND OWNERS ON MANAGING THEIR IP PORTFOLIOS IN CHINA?

China has now erected an intellectual property protection regime that covers copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, geographical indications, new plant varieties and integrated circuit layout designs, which has given rise to a multilayered intellectual property legal protection net consisting of laws, regulations, local regulations, administrative rules and judicial interpretations. Additionally, the intensity of judicial protection of intellectual property in China is continuously increasing. In 2014, intellectual property courts were established in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou and, as at 2018, the courts in numerous cities, including Nanjing, Suzhou, Wuhan, Chengdu and Hefei, have established dedicated intellectual property adjudication organizations. In recent years, penalties in intellectual property law violation cases have become severe in China, with an intent to increase enterprises' costs of violating the law. An increasing number of foreign enterprises are opting to institute intellectual property legal actions in China.

The Chinese government is continuing its efforts to push forward the revision of a series of intellectual property related laws to intensify the protection of intellectual property and punishment of infringers. Thus, I am confident that the intellectual property of foreign investors will get even better protection in China. In managing its intellectual property in China, a foreign brand owner needs to first get a handle on the basic realities and the legal systems of China, seek the advice of a professional service firm in formulating a complete intellectual property related business strategy that is consistent with its development in the Chinese market, duly plan out its intellectual property business in advance, get a detailed grasp on and conduct improvement work on its intellectual property already in the Chinese market and establish an intellectual property management system with specific persons responsible for specific items.

5 . DO YOU THINK THE SUPREME PEOPLE'S COURT (SPC) IS PROVIDING BETTER GUIDANCE FOR FUTURE DISPUTES THROUGH ITS COURT DECISIONS?

In 2005, the SPC first proposed the “establishment and improvement of a precedent case guidance system” in the Second Five-year Reform Program for People's Courts (2004-2008). In December 2008, the Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission of the Communist Party of China, Opinions on Several Issues Concerning Further Intensifying Reform of the Judicial System and Work Mechanisms presented the precedent case guidance system as one of the key items in state judicial reform. On November 26, 2010, the SPC issued the Provisions for the Precedent Case Guidance Work, marking the formal establishment of a precedent case guidance system with Chinese characteristics. In 2014, it was proposed at the Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China to “strengthen and regulate judicial interpretations and precedent case guidance and unify law application standards”, indicating the direction in further improving China's precedent case guidance system.

Item (11), Actively Promoting the Intellectual Property Precedent Case Guidance System, of Section Five of the Supreme People's Court, Circular on the Issuance of the Program for the Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property in China (2016-2020) (Fa Fa [2017] No.13) expressly points out that the intellectual property guiding cases issued by the SPC, cases in the SPC Gazette, the typical cases issued by the Intellectual Property Division of the SPC, the cases issued by the “Intellectual Property Precedent case guidance Research Base (Beijing) of the Supreme People's Court” and the typical intellectual property cases issued by the Judicial Case Research Institute of the SPC are to form an objective and reasonable collection of cases, and specifies the respective mechanisms for selecting cases, their effectiveness ranking, the issuing entities and the methods of issuance. Fa Fa [2017] No.13 also calls for constituting a precedent case system that includes both guiding cases and reference cases and realizing an interactive mechanism in which the generation of the various types of cases is strictly regulated and they are continuously compiled, updated and replaced. Establishment of a database that covers intellectual property cases nationwide and creation of a smart case information management and application system are also addressed.

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court has set precedent case guidance as a basic adjudication policy and issued a series of complementary assurance measures. From its establishment on November 6, 2014 to October 31, 2016, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court cited precedents in rendering its judgments/rulings in 168 cases. Thus, from the future intellectual property judicial perspective, the SPC will guide the resolution of disputes through combining laws and regulations with precedents.

6 . WHAT ARE SOME THE MOST INTERESTING TRADEMARK DISPUTES THAT WERE HEARD IN THE IP COURTS RECENTLY?

• Skechers victory at appeal and an award of Rmb3 million in damages

The appeal in the trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute case in which the well-known American footwear and apparel company Skechers USA, Inc. sued Spieth & Wensky Sports Goods Co., Ltd. and Quanzhou Bohai Shoe Industry Co., Ltd. has concluded in the Fujian Provincial Higher People's Court. Skechers USA, Inc. prevailed at appeal and was awarded damages for economic loss in the amount of Rmb3 million (including reasonable expenses). In this case, the legal points involved in overturning the first instance case judgment by the appeal court in accordance with the law concerning infringement arising from the non-compliant use of the trademark in question, infringement of the proprietary trade dress right of the well-known goods and fraudulent publicity are worth noting.

• The Commercial Press' “新华字典” (Xinhua Dictionary) is an unregistered well-known trademark, and the court determined that Sinolingua had infringed the trademark and engaged in unfair competition

The Commercial Press Limited took Sinolingua Co., Ltd. to court on the grounds that it “produced and sold without authorization a dictionary bearing the title '新华字典' (Xinhua Dictionary), causing confusion in the market” and requested damages in the amount of Rmb3.4 million. Recently, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court ordered Sinolingua to immediately cease the trademark infringement and unfair competition, publish a statement in relevant media, such as China Press Publication Radio Film and Television Journal, eliminate the effect and pay the plaintiff, The Commercial Press, damages in the amount of Rmb3 million for economic loss and more than Rmb270,000 for reasonable expenditures.

• As “怕上火喝加多宝” (when you're worried about suffering from excessive internal heat (a Chinese medicinal symptom), drink Jiaduobao) contains a misleading description, it cannot be used as a trademark

The Beijing Municipal Higher People's Court rendered its appeal judgment, upholding the judgment at first instance, holding that the trademark “怕上火喝加多宝” (when you're worried about suffering from excessive internal heat (a Chinese medicinal symptom), drink Jiaduobao) the registration of which JDB applied for in 2012 in the name of “Wong Lo Kat Limited” contained a misleading description, violating Item (7) of the first paragraph of Article 10 of the Trademark Law, and could not be used as a trademark.

• “鼓浪屿” (Gulang Island) meat pastry prevailed in trademark infringement case. The defendant was ordered to pay Rmb500,000 in damages

A food enterprise in Xiamen that had the words “Special product of Gulang Island” printed on the boxes of meat pastries that it sold had several disputes in court with the holder of the trademark in the old trade name “鼓浪屿” (Gulang Island) meat pastries, Xiamen Xingmao Trading Co., Ltd., in the past few years. Recently, the Fujian Provincial Higher People's Court rendered the final judgment in this trademark infringement case involving the traditional trade name “鼓浪屿” (Gulang Island), ordering the company to cease using the trademark on its packaging and pay damages in the amount of Rmb500,000.

7 . HOW WOULD STRICTER REGULATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT AFFECT THE WORK OF AN IP LAWYER?

The gradual improvement of intellectual property laws and regulations, and the intensification of law enforcement will test intellectual property lawyers' intelligence and knowledge structure. In recent years, with innovations in business models, intellectual property has shown a tendency toward cross-area development, and intellectual property lawyers, while improving their professional knowledge, are also required to engage in cross-area cooperation with industry professionals to achieve a blending of the pertinent knowledge and experience. In other words, the establishment of an extensive melding of the work of professional technical personnel, agencies, enterprises and lawyers.

Through many years of cooperation and confrontation between China and western countries, a system and culture particular to China has taken shape. China will, on the basis of its characteristic systems and methods of operation, continue to have a major impact on the world economy. The development of China's intellectual property systems and industry will not simply dovetail with the systems led by the West, so Chinese intellectual property lawyers need to consider and analyze problems in light of Chinese factors and from an international perspective based on the foundation of China's development.

In many industries, China is now a world leader and Chinese intellectual property lawyers will often face new cases for which there are no precedents for guidance. Thus, Chinese intellectual property lawyers require great foresight and need to comprehensively judge and consider the details of cases by taking into account basic legal principles, Chinese realities and international development trends.

Li Zheng, Partner

Jingtian & Gongcheng

Li Zheng was qualified to practice PRC law in 2005. She is a member of the Beijing Lawyers Association and a member of the Copyright Committee of the Association.

Ms Zheng graduated from Capital Normal University, China University of Political Science and Law and Chicago-Kent College of Law with an LL.B in Russian culture and language, LL.B in political science and law, and an LL.M in U.S international & transnational law respectively.

Before joining Jingtian & Gongcheng in July 2015, she had had more than 10 years of law practicing experience, including ample experience in a managerial position in the legal department of internet, as well as culture and media companies.

Her main practice areas include domestic IP protection (trademarks and copyrights), international IP transactions and IP dispute resolution. Legal services cover such sectors as internet, culture and media, entertainment, music, films and television, education, fitness exercises and telecommunications.

Ms Zheng is fluent in both Mandarin and English.

1 . 中国在知识产权方面取得极大进展。您认为这背后最大的推动力是什么？

1. 树立尊重知识产权意识。树立知识即资本的观念，进一步提高科学意识观念，明确认识到知识资本决定着一个国家、一个民族竞争的优势，国家的发展需要树立科学发达、技术进步和创新精神。
2. 加大力度实施科教兴国的战略。教育落后，人民素质低下，这是制约国家知识经济发展的首要因素。因此，发展知识经济，大力发展教育，提高人力资本素质，培养有创新精神和能力的人才。
3. 促进国家信息产业和其他高新科技产业的发展。随着信息产业的发展，并成为国际竞争的先导产业和国民经济的主导产业，该产业带动整个工业结构的优化和产业结构 的升级的方针政策。
4. 加速知识产权相关的立法及司法改革。伴随着商标法、专利法、著作权法等法律的实施逐步建立起了以司法保护为主导，民事审判为基础，行政审判和刑事审判并行发展的知识产权司法保护体制机制。
5. 各级政府进一步发挥宏观调控作用，引导和调控全社会资金投向知识经济，加强政府财政支持，制定优惠的税收政策 。

2 . 您认为《电子商务法》将怎样改变知识产权诉讼的格局？

《电子商务法》42条的规定了不同于以往司法实践的 “通知-删除” 的前提条件，在以往司法实践中，电子商务平台经营者收到有关知识产权侵权行为的通知后，仅在该行为有较大侵权可能性时，其才负有义务阻止该等行为。而在电子商务法42条规定的字面意思并未有较大侵权可能性才能采取阻止行为的规定，即在电子商务平台经营者在收到有关知识产权侵权的通知后，只要该通知包括构成侵权的初步证据，即使通知所称的侵权行为存在的可能性较小，电子商务平台经营者也有义务对该等行为进行阻止。如果平台内经营者接到转送的通知后，可以向电子商务平台经营者提交不存在侵权行为的声明。声明应当包括不存在侵权行为的初步证据。电子商务平台经营者接到声明后，应当将该声明转送发出通知的知识产权权利人，并告知其可以向有关主管部门投诉或者向人民法院起诉。电子商务平台经营者在转送声明到达知识产权权利人后十五日内，未收到权利人已经投诉或者起诉通知的，应当及时终止所采取的措施。该条款的规定一方面会使知识产权权利人行使其权利更加便利，但另一方面也会导致知识产权权利人滥用权利，严重影响电子商务平台经营者和平台内经营者的利益。该条规定将会导致知识产权诉讼人、电子平台经营者、平台内经营者诉讼纠纷争议的频发。

随着电子商务的急速发展，恶意投诉电子商务平台内经营者的行为越来越普遍，严重影响了电子商务平台的正常运行。《电子商务法》第42条第三款的规定，知识产权权利人恶意通知电子商务平台，宣称平台上存在侵犯知识产权的行为，造成电子商务平台经营者损失的，应当承担加倍赔偿责任。此条是我国第一次从立法层面对向电子商务平台发出恶意通知的行为设立惩罚赔偿制度。该惩罚赔偿制度虽然在阻止恶意投诉、促进电子商务平台健康发展上起到积极作用，另外在该法第84条进一步规定，在平台内经营者实施侵犯知识产权行为时，电商平台未依法采取必要措施的，承担罚款最高至200万元。上述的规定均会在知识产权诉讼中，影响知识产权利人与电子平台经营者、平台内经营者纠纷中赔偿数额的认定。

3 . 您是否认为《电子商务法》一旦施行，将对假冒伪造商产生重大影响？最有可能受损的是电商平台经营者还是微商？

目前假冒产品主要集中于平台内经营者，主要包括个人经营者、微商、代购领域。《电商法》第九条规定 “本法所称电子商务经营者，是指通过互联网等信息网络从事销售商品或者提供服务的经营活动的自然人、法人和非法人组织，包括电子商务平台经营者、平台内经营者以及通过自建网站、其他网络服务销售商品或者提供服务的电子商务经营者。” 该款规定表明电子商务经营者包括法人和非法人组织，包括电子商务平台经营者、平台内个人经营者等，微商、代购均受《电商法》的约束。

《电子商务法》第十条、十二条规定，电子商务经营者应满足以下条件方可从事经营活动：1、应当依法办理工商登记，拥有营业执照，但是个人销售自产农副产品、家庭手工业产品，个人利用自己的技能从事依法无须取得许可的便民劳务活动和零星小额交易活动，以及依照法律、行政法规不需要进行登记的除外；2、必须依法纳税；3、如果销售食品，还须申请食品流通许可证。需要特别注意的是，电子商务经营者除了依法进行登记办理营业执照外，还应当将其持续展示在显著位置，否则将面临最高1万元的罚款。这意味着，消费者如果通过电子商务经营者处买到劣质假冒的产品，可以有理有据地维权。但对电子商务经营者而言，信息的公开程度增加、监管力度加大、纳税会让成本增加，将会使其没有价格优势。

《电子商务法》第十七条规定：“电子商务经营者应当全面、真实、准确、及时地披露商品或者服务信息，保障消费者的知情权和选择权。电子商务经营者不得以虚构交易、编造用户评价等方式进行虚假或者引人误解的商业宣传，欺骗、误导消费者。”第三十九条规定：“电子商务平台经营者应当建立健全信用评价制度，公示信用评价规则，为消费者提供对平台内销售的商品或者提供的服务进行评价的途径。电子商务平台经营者不得删除消费者对其平台内销售的商品或者提供的服务的评价。” 违反上述规定者，由市场监督管理部门责令限期改正，可以处2万元以上10万元以下的罚款；情节严重的，处10万元以上50 万元以下的罚款。

该条规定禁止电商平台擅自 “刷好评” “删差评”，否则最高罚款50万元。很多人网购时都习惯参考他人的评价，立法以前电子商务经营者以 “刷好评” “删差评” 的方式伪造用户评价，会让某些商品的评价显示好评，吸引消费者购买，该种方式在电子商务法中被明令禁止，并加强电子商务平台经营者的监管责任。消费者权益可以得到更大的保障，假冒产品的卖家靠提供虚假交易评价信息的操作方法会被法律所禁止，假冒产品的卖家将面对真实的市场竞争环境，不靠质量取胜的产品操作模式最终将会被市场淘汰。

《电子商务法》第三十八条规定：“电子商务平台经营者知道或者应当知道平台内经营者销售的商品或者提供的服务不符合保障人身、财产安全的要求，或者有其他侵害消费者合法权益行为，未采取必要措施的，依法与该平台内经营者承担连带责任。” 第四十五条规定：“电子商务平台经营者知道或者应当知道平台内经营者侵犯知识产权的，应当采取删除、屏蔽、断开链接、终止交易和服务等必要措施；未采取必要措施的，与侵权人承担连带责任。”这两条规定意味着如果平台上卖家的商品有问题，那么平台也得承担责任，最高面临200万元罚款。对于电商平台来说，该条的监管责任进一步加强。为了确保合规，互联网企业将会采用比政策法律更严谨的管理规则和用户协议。监管越来越严格，消费者买到假冒伪劣商品的概率也会越来越小。

总之，《电子商务法》实施之后，无论是电商平台提供方还是电商经营者（代购、微商）等电子商务经营者要受到严格的监管，还要依法纳税，电商平台的各种乱象会得到规范和治理，但消费者将为最终的收益者，其在网购商品时，也会得到越来越多的保障。

4 . 您对外国品牌所有人管理他们在华知识产权组合方面有什么建议？

目前，中国已经构建起包括著作权、商标、专利、商业秘密、地理标志、植物新品种、集成电路布图设计在内的知识产权保护体系，形成了包括法律、法规、地方性法规、行政规章和司法解释在内的多层次知识产权法律保护网。与此同时，中国对知识产权的司法保护力度在不断加大。2014年北京、上海、广州设立知识产权法院，截止至2018年南京、苏州、武汉、成都、合肥等多个城市法院专门设立知识产权审判机构。中国近年来对知识产权违法案件处罚严厉，意在提高企业的违法成本。越来越多的外国企业选择在中国进行知识产权诉讼。

中国政府仍然持续加大力度推进一系列的知识产权保护相关法律的修订工作，来加大知识产权的保护力度，加大对侵权者的惩罚力度。所以我相信外国投资者的知识产权在中国会得到越来越好的保护。外国品牌拥有人在中国管理知识产权首先应了解中国的基本国情和法律制度，咨询专业服务机构制定符合自己在中国市场发展的知识产权整体的经营策略，提前做好知识产权业务的布局，对已经在中国市场存在的知识产权进行详细梳理和完善工作，并建立专人专项的知识产权管理体系。

5 . 您认为最高人民法院是否通过法院判决，为今后的争议提供更好的指引？

2005年，最高人民法院在《人民法院第二个五年改革纲要（2004-2008）》中首次提出要 “建立和完善案例指导制度”。2008年12月，《中央政法委员会关于深化司法体制和工作机制改革若干问题的意见》将案例指导制度作为国家司法改革的一项重要内容。2010年11月26日，最高人民法院颁布《关于案例指导工作的规定》，这标志着中国特色案例指导制度正式确立。2014年，十八届四中全会提出 “加强和规范司法解释和案例指导，统一法律适用标准”，为进一步完善我国案例指导制度指明了方向。

最高人民法院关于印发《中国知识产权司法保护纲要（2016-2020）》的通知 (法发[2017]13 号) 第五条（十一）积极推行知识产权案例指导制度中明确指出：最高人民法院发布的知识产权指导性案例、公报案例、最高人民法院知识产权审判庭发布的典型案例、“最高人民法院知识产权案例指导研究（北京）基地”发布的案例以及最高人民法院司法案例研究院发布的知识产权典型案例要形成科学合理的案例群，明确各自案例的遴选机制、效力层级、发布主体和发布方式。构建指导性案例和参考性案例并存的案例体系，实现各种案例严格规范生成和不断编纂更新替代的互动机制。建立覆盖全国的知识产权案例数据库，打造智能化案例信息管理和应用系统。

北京知识产权法院将案例指导确立为基本审判方针，并推出了一系列配套保障措施。自2014年11月6日建院以来至2016年10月31日，北京知识产权法院已在168起案件中援引先例作出裁判。所以，从今后知识产权的司法角度来看，最高法院将通过法律法规结合案例形式对争议解决作出指导。

6 . 近期知识产权法院审理了哪些最值得关注的商标争议案？

• Skechers二审胜诉获赔300 万元

美国知名鞋服类品牌公司斯凯杰美国公司诉斯凯奇体育用品有限公司、泉州博海鞋业有限公司侵害商标权及不正当竞争纠纷一案，在福建省高级人民法院二审审结。斯凯杰美国公司二审胜诉，获赔经济损失达300 万元（含合理费用）。本案中，二审依法改判涉及的商标不规范使用侵权、侵犯知名商品特有装潢权以及虚假宣传行为等法律点值得关注

• 商务印书馆「新华字典」为未注册驰名商标，法院判定华语出版社侵犯商标权及不正当竞争

商务印书馆有限公司以 “擅自生产和销售打着'新华字典'名义的辞书，导致市场混淆” 为由，将华语教学出版社有限责任公司告上法庭，并索赔340万元。近日，北京知识产权法院判决被告华语出版社立即停止涉案侵害商标权及不正当竞争行为，在《中国新闻出版广电报》等相关媒体上刊登声明，消除影响，赔偿原告商务印书馆经济损失300 万元及合理支出27 万余元。

• 「怕上火喝加多宝」含误导性描述不得作商标

北京市高级人民法院作出二审判决，维持原判，认为由加多宝方面2012年以“王老吉有限公司”名义申请注册的“怕上火喝加多宝”商标含误导性描述，违反商标法第十条第一款第七项规定，不得作为商标使用。

• 「鼓浪屿」馅饼打赢商标侵权官司！被告被罚50 万元

厦门一家食品企业在其所售馅饼的包装盒上标注了 “鼓浪屿特产” 字样，与老字号 “鼓浪屿” 馅饼的商标持有人――厦门兴茂贸易有限公司在过去几年内数度对簿公堂。近日，福建省高级人民法院对这起涉“鼓浪屿”传统老字号商标侵权案作出终审宣判，判决该公司停止在包装使用上的侵权行为，并支付50 万元赔偿金。

7 . 更严格的法规和执法将怎样影响知识产权律师的工作？

知识产权法律法规逐步健全及执法力度的增强，将更考验知识产权律师智慧和知识结构。近年来知识产权随着商业模式创新，呈现跨界发展趋势，知识产权律师在建立完善自己专业知识的同时，还应与行业专家跨界合作，达成相应知识经验的融合。也就是说，建立专业技术人员、代理机构、企业和律师工作深度结合。

中国与西方国家多年的合作与对抗中已经形成了中国独特的体制、文化，中国将以自己特色的体制和运行方式继续在世界经济中产生重大的影响。中国知识产权制度和产业的发展绝不是简单的与西方主导的制度去接轨，中国的知识产权律师应结合中国因素基于中国发展基础的国际视角考虑和分析问题。

目前很多产业中国走在了世界的前沿，中国的知识产权律师经常会面对无先例可循的新案，所以中国知识产权律师应具有前瞻性眼光，结合基础法理和中国国情与国际发展趋势对案情进行综合判定与考量。

郑莉 合伙人

竞天公诚律师事务所

郑莉律师于2005 年获得中华人民共和国律师资格。她是北京市律师协会会员及协会著作权专业委员会委员。

郑律师于首都师范大学取得俄语语言文学学士学位，于中国政法大学取得法学双学士学位，并于美国伊利诺伊理工大学芝加哥肯特法学院取得美国法及跨国冲突法法学硕士学位。

2015年7月，郑律师加入竞天公诚并成为律师。在加入竞天公诚之前，她已具有10年以上法律从业经验，包括在互联网公司及文化传媒公司的法务部门管理人员的丰富工作经验。

她的主要业务领域包括国内知识产权保护（著作权、商标权）、国际知识产权贸易、知识产权争议解决。提供法律服务涉及的行业包括互联网、文化传媒、娱乐、音乐、影视、教育、健身运动、电信等。

郑律师的工作语言是中文和英文。