国产一级片a-亚洲综合影院-成人免费毛片app-老妇女av-亚洲色图久久-欧美日韩123-一个色的综合-不卡一区二区在线观看-九九久久九九久久-国产毛片a-欧美成人做爰猛烈床戏-粉嫩av一区二区三区免费观看-一区二区国产视频-色护士影院-日本黄色片

Recently, SIPO released major IP statistics for 2017.

It shows that in 2017, there were 1.382 million invention patent applications, an increase of 14.2%. A total of 420,000 invention patents were granted, of which 327,000 were domestic invention patents with an increase of 8.2% over the same period of last year. By the end of 2017, the total number of invention patents in China (excluding Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan) totaled 1.356 million.

In 2017, the top 10 enterprises with the most granted invention patents (excluding Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan) are China State Grid Corporation (3622 pieces), Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (3293 pieces), China Petrochemical Corporation (2567 pieces), BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. (1845 pieces), ZTE Corporation (1699 pieces), Lenovo (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (1454 pieces), Zhuhai Gree Electric Appliances Co., Ltd. (1273 pieces), Guangdong Opal Mobile Communications Co., Ltd. (1222 pieces), PetroChina Company Limited (1008 pieces) and Semiconductor Manufacturing International (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (862 pieces).

During 2017, SIPO received 51,000 PCT applications, an increase of 12.5%. Among them, 48,000 are from domestic applicants, an increase of 12.5%. There are seven provinces (incl. autonomous regions and municipalities) with over 1,000 PCT applications, which are Guangdong (268,000), Beijing (5,100), Jiangsu (4,600), Shanghai (2,100), Shandong (1,700), Zhejiang (1,400) and Hubei (1,300). The above-mentioned seven provinces and municipalities account for more than 90% of the domestic PCT applications.

The data also shows that in 2017, 5608 Chinese patent applications were published in the Belt and Road countries / regions (excluding China), an increase of 16.0%, while 4,319 patent applications from Belt and Road countries / regions were filed in China, an increase of 16.8%. The number of countries applying for patents in China reached 41, an increase of 4 over 2016. In addition, SIPO also released the data such as of the nationwide patent administrative enforcement cases, patent pledged financing, patent review requests and invalidation claim cases, as well as the data concerning patent agencies. (Source: sipo.gov.cn)

According to the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (SAIC), the AIC system nationwide focused on curbing bad-faith pre-emption of trademarks and cracking down on trademark infringement in 2017. From January to November 2017, 21,000 cases of trademark infringement or counterfeiting were handled, involving a total value of 273 million yuan and a fine of 365 million yuan.

At the same time, China Trademark Office takes active measures to advance trademark monitoring and protection, by sorting out applications with typical bad-faith intention, conducting expedited and consolidated examination with stricter criteria, and issuing ex officio rejection. In opposition procedures, bad-faith registrations in violation of the principle of good faith are resolutely prevented. As of now, the Trademark Office has rejected numbers of bad-faith applications, which sets example for curbing all kinds of bad-faith registrations of trademarks.

(Source: China Business News)

In 2017, 5.748 million trademark applications were filed in China, an increase of 55.7% over the previous year, making the new highs in both the filing amount and the growth rate.

By the end of 2017, China had had 27.842 million accumulated trademark applications, 17.301 million accumulated registered trademarks, 14. 92 million effective registered trademarks, ranking first in the world for 17 consecutive years.

Chinese brand influence has also increased around the world simultaneously. The 2017 World’s Top 500 Brands published by World Brands Laboratory includes 37 brands from China, an increase of 150% over 2013. Last year, China applicants filed 4,810 Madrid international trademark registration applications, an increase of 59.6% over the previous year, ranking third among the member states.

China Trademark Office announced adoption of 2018 Version of the 11th Edition of Nice Classification effective from January 1, 2018.

Based on the latest Nice Classification, China Trademark Office has also made adjustment to the Table of Similar Goods and Services, which came into force on the same day.

Agreed by both the SIPO and the German Patent and Trademark Office, Sino-German Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) will be extended for an additional three years from January 23, 2018 to January 22, 2021, with the relevant requirements and procedures for PPH request submission remaining unchanged.

Pursuant to " Memorandum of Understanding between People's Republic of China State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) and the National Institute of Industrial Property of Brazil(INPI) on the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Pilot Project", SIPO-INPI PPH pilot was launched on February 1, 2018, which shall expire either on January 31, 2020 after two years, or upon 200 applications received by the two offices under the PPH pilot project, whichever comes first.

It shall be noted, however, that the SIPO-INPI PPH pilot project is of limited nature, conducted only for limited project models, limited technical fields and limited number of applications.

Recently, Beijing Higher People's Court issued final judgement on the dispute over TRAB decision concerning invalidation of trademark "卡斯特拉斐CASTEL LAFITE" registered by Xinji Futai Leatherware Co., Ltd. on January 14, 2013 in respect of clothing in Class 25. The Court found that the prior trademark “LAFITE”registered by Chateau Lafite Rothschild (The Plaintiff) in respect of alcoholic goods in Class 33 enjoys high reputation among the public and thus has constituted well-known trademark; that the disputed mark fully incorporates the prior well-known mark “LAFITE” and one of its corresponding Chinese 拉斐, and has constituted copy, imitation or translation of the cited well-known mark, damaged the fixed connection between the cited mark and its labeled product, diluted the distinctiveness of the cited mark, and may have impaired plaintiff’s interest. Beijing Higher People's Court issued final judgement to revoke the judgement of the first instance and the decision made by Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) and ordered TRAB to issue anew decision on the invalidation case.

On behalf of client Sogou, Unitalen brought a civil action against Baidu on the ground of unfair competition. Beijing Higher People's Court made the second instance judgement that the software bundling conducted by Baidu in the name of "high-speed downloading" causing users to download additional “Baidu anti-virus”, “Baidu browser”, “Baidu mobile assistants” and other software, unexpectedly, without knowledge or sufficient judgement, while they were downloading Sogou software, has constituted unfair competition. The final judgement maintained the first instance judgement made by Beijing Intellectual Property Court, according to which Baidu is ordered to stop unfair competition acts, compensate Sogou’s economic loss of 500,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of 42,252 yuan, and make public statements on the Baidu website to eliminate the impact.

With regard to the nature of the alleged unfair competition conduct in this case, Beijing Higher Court believe it has constituted "software bundling act" as stipulated in Article 9 of the "Several Provisions on Regulating the Market Order of Internet Information Services". The key of this determination is the fact that Baidu did not prompt the users in an obvious manner in order for users to choose at their discretion whether to install or use Baidu software.?The court also held that Baidu did not provide any evidence to prove that “Baidu Mobile Assistant” had the function of speeding up the downloading but cheated and misled users downloading and installing Sogou software to download the irrelevant Baidu software in the name of "highspeed download”. Such act is deceptive, misleading, and violating the ethics recognized by the Internet industry.?Baidu Company's defense that the alleged act is a usual practice in the industry failed to obtain the court support.

Beijing Higher Court pointed out, in particular, that the alleged acts 1) directly affected user's right to decide on the installation and use of Internet software, 2) improperly took advantage of user's appreciation and demand for Sogou software to increase its trading opportunities and competitive advantages, which is essentially an illegal act of utilizing the commercial achievements of others for its own business opportunities and competitive advantages, and 3) damaged the goodwill and competitive interests of Sogou Software.

In recent years, leading companies in hot fields have often been subject to patent infringement litigation. DJI ushered a year of frequent patent infringement suits in 2017. After being sued by Galaxee (Beijing) Intelligent Technology Research Institute Co., Ltd.(Galaxee) based on 20 patents, DJI entrusted Unitalen to file a petition to invalidate Galaxee’s Patent No.201520481794.8. for a multi-rotor aircraft and flying control method for fixed-dimensionality flying.

Patent Reexamination Board made a decision on December 29, 2017 declaring Patent No.201520481794.8 shall be invalidated in whole. Consequently, the patent infringement suit filed by Galaxee before Shanghai Intellectual Property Court were also dismissed.