China Supreme Court Issued Programmatic Document on Trial of IP Cases
February 12, 2007On January 15, the Supreme People's Court published its Opinions on Overall Strengthening of Trial of IP Cases to Provide Legal Guarantee for Building up an Innovative Country (hereinafter referred to as the Opinions), which sets forth a series of specific measures to strengthen the trial of IP cases.
The Opinions points out, full part should be given to the functionary role of IP crime judicial guarantee, various measures should be taken to sanction IP criminals according to law so that the function of criminal punishment and prevention against IP crimes can be brought into full play. Regarding such offensive behaviors as shamming and pirating copyrights, criteria of their measurement should be further consummated and standardized, and application of suspension of sentence should be standardized. All the guilt must be punished severely according to law in light of the seriousness of case and harmful consequence.
The Opinions has further set clear the basic measurement for the trial of various civil IP cases and formulated a series of specific measures in order to enhance judicial protection in IP civil cases. Accurate definitions are made for the owner of IP and the right of the social public.
In order to carry out the judicial measure for convenience to the people, the Opinions also clearly provides for the implementation of an investigation order system, namely, when the party involved in a case is unable to get by himself any evidence kept in the custody of any state department or any other evidences for some objective reasons, an alternative may be explored that the attorney-in-fact of the party can be authorized to investigate the case and collect such evidence on his behalf.
The Opinions recommends, civil IP cases should be in principle heard by the court above the intermediate court, or by some grass-root courts designated by the Supreme Court after report by the local high court where the number of cases is large with heavy pressure of trial.
The Opinions specially points out, well-known trademarks should be recognized with prudence according to law. In the event of any case beyond the scope or not up to the requirements, and any groundless accusation on infringement by the plaintiff, no well-known trademark can be recognized.
The Opinions points out, full part should be given to the functionary role of IP crime judicial guarantee, various measures should be taken to sanction IP criminals according to law so that the function of criminal punishment and prevention against IP crimes can be brought into full play. Regarding such offensive behaviors as shamming and pirating copyrights, criteria of their measurement should be further consummated and standardized, and application of suspension of sentence should be standardized. All the guilt must be punished severely according to law in light of the seriousness of case and harmful consequence.
The Opinions has further set clear the basic measurement for the trial of various civil IP cases and formulated a series of specific measures in order to enhance judicial protection in IP civil cases. Accurate definitions are made for the owner of IP and the right of the social public.
In order to carry out the judicial measure for convenience to the people, the Opinions also clearly provides for the implementation of an investigation order system, namely, when the party involved in a case is unable to get by himself any evidence kept in the custody of any state department or any other evidences for some objective reasons, an alternative may be explored that the attorney-in-fact of the party can be authorized to investigate the case and collect such evidence on his behalf.
The Opinions recommends, civil IP cases should be in principle heard by the court above the intermediate court, or by some grass-root courts designated by the Supreme Court after report by the local high court where the number of cases is large with heavy pressure of trial.
The Opinions specially points out, well-known trademarks should be recognized with prudence according to law. In the event of any case beyond the scope or not up to the requirements, and any groundless accusation on infringement by the plaintiff, no well-known trademark can be recognized.
Keywords
Headquarters
Add(Beijing):7th Floor,Scitech Place,22 Jianguomenwai Avenue,Beijing 100004,China
Tel: ＋86 10 5920 8888
Fax: ＋86 10 5920 8588
E-mail: mail@unitalen.com
Newsletter
Do not miss out on the latest announcements we've provided
Networking
Unitalen Mail Box ?2016 Unitalen Attorneys at Law 版權(quán)所有 集佳知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)代理有限公司 京ICP備11033076號(hào) 京公網(wǎng)安備11010502020670