Advertisement

Specialized IP Courts in China – Judicial Governance of Intellectual Property Rights

  • Nari Lee
  • Liguo Zhang
Article
  • 238 Downloads

Abstract

At the end of 2014, China introduced new specialist intellectual property (IP) courts. Although China had IP tribunals within the People’s Courts, the reform to establish separate IP courts was touted as a significant step in establishing the rule of law in the governance of IPRs in China. This is not surprising considering that an independent judiciary is central to the rule of law. This institution affirms and enforces private rights, as well as providing necessary impartiality in the process of decision-making among peer institutions. China has recently undergone several legislative reforms which amend substantive IP law. It is not surprising that this was followed by both administrative and judicial reforms. Introducing a specialized court with exclusive jurisdiction will likely affect other institutions with similar competences, e.g. general courts or administrative tribunals. Institutional choices significantly affect the outcome of decision-making because the processes of decision-making differ and will involve different stakeholders. Often, institutions move together and a change in one of them is likely to cause a change in another, even without explicit efforts to effect such changes. Therefore, any institutional reform project needs to reflect measures to contain or coordinate unintended consequences or impacts on other institutions resulting from such changes. This paper places Chinese specialized courts in a global context. We will first describe the function of a specialized IP court from a comparative institutional perspective. Next, we place the Chinese specialized IP courts in the context of the national administration-driven IP strategy to highlight the Chinese characteristics. In its analysis, this paper explores whether the perspective of institutional comparison may be applied to Chinese institutional reforms. It also argues that the rationale for introducing specialized IP courts in China may be more than merely improving technological competence and concentration of expertise of the court; it signals a step towards independent judicial decision-making, towards the establishment of the rule of law and market-oriented decision-making.

Keywords

Specialized IP Court China IP Institutional comparison Rule of law 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Nari Lee would like to thank Professor Lionel Bently and Dr. Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan of the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law at the faculty of law, Cambridge University, who hosted her during the research visit in 2016.

References

  1. Alford WP (1995) To steal a book is an elegant offense: intellectual property law in Chinese civilization. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakardjieva Engelbrekt A (2007) Copyright from an institutional perspective: actors, interests, stakes and the logic of participation. Rev Econ Res Copyr Issues 4:65Google Scholar
  3. Beijing Municipal Higher People’s Court Guidance on the Determination of Copyright Infringement Liability for Damages (in Chinese: 北京市高级人民法院关于确定著作权侵权损害赔偿责任的指导意见)Google Scholar
  4. Buchanan JM (1989) Explorations into constitutional economics. Texas A&M University Press, College StationGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen J (2011) IP law enforcement in China: think outside the box. In: Antons C (ed) The enforcement of intellectual property rights. Comparative perspectives from the Asia-Pacific region. Wolters Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp 291–313Google Scholar
  6. Chen J (2016) Chinese law: context and transformation, 3rd edn. Brill Nijhoff Publishers, BostonGoogle Scholar
  7. China Patents and Trademarks (2015) The SPC releases the briefing about the establishment and operation of intellectual property courts, vol 4. China Patents and Trademarks, p 43. http://www.cpt.cn/. Accessed 15 Jan 2017
  8. Datla K, Revesz RL (2013) Deconstructing independent agencies (and executive agencies). Cornell Law Rev 9:769Google Scholar
  9. De Werra J (2016) Specialised IP courts: issues and challenges. In: de Werra J, Barbosa DB, Barbosa PMN, Xue H, Basheer S, Štrba SI (eds) Specialised intellectual property courts—issues and challenges. ICTSD Study. http://www.ictsd.org/themes/innovation-and-ip/research/specialised-intellectual-property-courts-issues-and-challenges. Accessed 15 July 2016
  10. Dean M (2010) Governmentality: power and rule in modern society. Sage Publications, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  11. Dimitrov M (2009) Piracy and the state: the politics of intellectual property rights in China. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dreyfuss RC (1989) The federal circuit: a case study in specialized courts. NYUL Rev 64:1Google Scholar
  13. Epstein RA (2008) Why the modern administrative state is inconsistent with the rule of law. NYUJL Lib 3:491Google Scholar
  14. Jiangsu Provincial Higher People’s Court’s guidance on the determination of fixed amount of damage for intellectual property infringement (in Chinese: 江苏省高级人民法院关于知识产权侵权损害适用定额赔偿办法若干问题的指导意见)Google Scholar
  15. Kaplow L (1992) Rules versus standards: an economic analysis. Duke Law J 42:557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Komesar NK (1994) Imperfect alternatives: choosing institutions in law, economics, and public policy. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. Kong X (2008) The law, policy and politics in judicial decisions—IP trial as an example. People’s Judic 24:26 (in Chinese: 孔祥俊, ‘裁判中的法律、政策与政治—以知识产权审判为例’ (2008) 人民司法 24: 26)Google Scholar
  18. Kur A, Bently LA, Ohly A (2009) Sweet smells and a sour taste—the ECJ’s l’Oréal decision. Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition & Tax Law Research Paper No. 09-12; University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 10/01. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1492032 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1492032. Accessed 15 July 2016
  19. Lee N (2016) Revisiting the principle of technological neutrality in patent protection in the age of 3D printing technology and cloud computing. In: Ullrich H, Hilty RM, Lamping M, Drexl J (eds) TRIPS plus 20. Springer, Berlin, pp 361–388Google Scholar
  20. Lee N, Li Y (2016) European standards in Chinese courts—a case of SEP and FRAND disputes in China. In: Lee N, Bruun N, Li M (eds) Governance of intellectual property in China and Europe. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lemos MH (2013) Interpretive methodology and delegations to courts—are “common law statutes” different. In: Balganesh S (ed) Intellectual property and the common law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 89–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li X (2012) Behind the recent surge of Chinese patenting: an institutional view. Res Policy 41(1):236–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li L (2014) Administrative enforcement of copyright law in China: a characteristic deserving of praise or repeal? In: Frankel S, Gervais D (eds) The evolution and equilibrium of copyright in the digital age. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 143–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li S (2015) The design and realization of the new pattern for specialized intellectual property adjudication—perspectives from Shanghai specialized IP courts. Law Appl 10:13–17 (in Chinese: 黎淑兰, 论知识产权专业化审判新格局的构建与实现-以上海知识产权法院专业化建设为视角 (2015) 10法律适用 13–17)Google Scholar
  25. Li M (2016a) Special intellectual property court in China. In: Lee N, Bruun N, Li M (eds) Governance of intellectual property in China and Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 65–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li M (2016b) Intellectual property law revision in China: transplantation and transformation. In: Lee N, Bruun N, Li M (eds) Governance of intellectual property in China and Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 303–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liddell K, Waibel M (2016) Fair and equitable treatment and judicial patent decisions. University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 4/2016. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2722452 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2722452. Accessed 20 July 2016
  28. Lin G (2015) Guangzhou story: the prism of the intellectual property court. Law Appl 10:18–23 (in Chinese: 林广海, 广州故事:知识产权法院多棱镜 (2015) 10 法律适用18:23)Google Scholar
  29. Liu S (2005) Legal transplants and the conflicts of legitimacy: Chinese grassroots judicial practice in the context of modernity. Sociol Res 3:36 (in Chinese: 刘思达, 法律移植与合法性冲突 (2005) 社会学研究 3:36)Google Scholar
  30. Menell PS (2013) The mixed heritage of federal intellectual property law and ramifications for statutory interpretation. In: Balganesh S (ed) Intellectual property and the common law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 63–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ming C (2012) Shanzhai phenomenon in China—the disparity between IPR legislation and enforcement. IIC 43(1):3Google Scholar
  32. Montgomery L (2010) China’s creative industries: copyright, social network markets and the business of culture in a digital age. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moses LN (2007) Recurring dilemmas: the law’s race to keep up with technological change. Univ Ill J Law Technol Policy 2007:239Google Scholar
  34. Nard CA (2010) Legal forms and the common law of patents. Boston Univ Law Rev 90:51Google Scholar
  35. Nard C, Duffy J (2007) Rethinking patent law’s uniformity principle. Northwest Law Rev 101:1619Google Scholar
  36. National People’s Congress of the People's Republic of China (2014) The decision of the standing committee of the National People’s Congress of China to establish intellectual property court in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou. http://npc.people.com.cn/n/2014/0901/c14576-25581035.html. Accessed 6 June 2016 (in Chinese: 全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于在北京、上海、广州设立知识产权法院的决定2014)
  37. Nie J (2006) The enforcement of intellectual property rights in China. Cameron May, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. North D (1990) Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pang L (2012) Creativity and its discontents: China’s creative industries and intellectual property rights offenses. Duke University Press, DurhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pedraza-Farina LG (2015) Understanding the federal circuit: an expert community approach. Berkeley Technol Law J 30:89Google Scholar
  41. Pegram JB (2000) Should there be a US trial court with a specialization in patent litigation? J Pat Trademark Off Soc 82:765Google Scholar
  42. People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (2014a) White paper on the status of the judicial protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Chinese Courts 2014 (Issued 20 April 2015). http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=15689. Accessed 15 July 2016
  43. People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (2014b) Guidance for the election of intellectual property court judges (trial) (in Chinese: 最高人民法院《知识产权法院法官选任工作指导意见 (试行)Google Scholar
  44. Petersen CS, Riis T, Schovsbo J (2015) The unified patent court (UPC) in action—how will the design of the UPC affect patent law? In: Ballardini RM, Norrgård M, Bruun N (eds) Transitions in European patent law: influences of the unitary patent package. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den RijnGoogle Scholar
  45. Posner RA (1982) Will the federal courts of appeals survive until 1984: an essay on delegation and specialization of the judicial function. South Calif Law Rev 56:761Google Scholar
  46. Prud’Homme D (2016) IP-conditioned government incentives in China and the EU: a comparative analysis of strategies and impacts on patent quality. In: Prud’Homme D, Song H (eds) Economic impacts of intellectual property-conditioned government incentives. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 13–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Radin MJ (1993) Compensation and commensurability. Duke Law J 43:56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Radin MJ (1996) Contested commodities: the trouble with trade in sex, children, body parts, and other things. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  49. Rai A (2002) Specialized trial courts: concentrating expertise on fact. Berkeley Technol Law J 17:877Google Scholar
  50. Rai A (2003) Engaging facts and policy: a multi-institutional approach to patent system reform. Columbia Law Rev 103:1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Raz J (1979) The authority of law. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  52. Rifkind S (1951) Special court for patent litigation—the danger of a specialized judiciary. ABAJ 37:425Google Scholar
  53. Rosati E (2013) Originality in EU copyright: full harmonization through case law. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruskola T (2013) Legal orientalism. Harvard University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schlag P (1985) Rules and standards. UCLA Law Rev 33:379Google Scholar
  56. Sherman B (1995) Governing science: patents and public-sector research in the United Kingdom. IIC 26(1):15–40Google Scholar
  57. State Council of the People’s Republic of China (2008) Outline of the National Intellectual Property Strategy, 25 June 2008. http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=859. Accessed 15 July 2016 (in Chinese: 国家知识产权战略纲要国务院2008年6月25日发布2008年6月25日生效)
  58. Su C (2015) Some issues about Beijing Intellectual Property Court. Sci Technol Law 1:8–20 (in Chinese: 宿迟 ‘北京知识产权法院若干问题’ (2015) 1 科技与法律 8–20)Google Scholar
  59. Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China (2009) Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on trials of IPR shall serve the overall interests under the current economic situation, 21 April 2009, FaFa 2009 No. 23 (in Chinese: 最高人民法院关于当前经济形势下知识产权审判服务大局若干问题的意见 (2009年4月21 日印发, 法发2009, 23号)Google Scholar
  60. Supreme People’s Court of the People's Republic of China (2014) Rules for the jurisdiction of the Intellectual Property Court of Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou (effective on 3 November 2014). http://www.chinacourt.org/law/detail/2014/10/id/147980.shtml. Accessed 6 June 2016 (in Chinese: 最高人民法院关于北京、上海、广州知识产权法院案件管辖的规定 法释12号)
  61. Tamura Y (2008) Towards the new paradigm of intellectual property law. The law and policy of intellectual property: building a new framework. Intellect Prop Law Policy J 20:11–20Google Scholar
  62. Tao J (2007) Problems and new developments in the enforcement of intellectual property rights in China. In: Torremans P, Shan H, Erauw J (eds) Intellectual property and TRIPs compliance in China: Chinese and European perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 107–124Google Scholar
  63. Thomas K (2007) The fight against piracy: working within the administrative enforcement system in China. In: Torremans P, Shan H, Erauw J (eds) Intellectual property and TRIPs compliance in China: Chinese and European perspectives. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 94–100Google Scholar
  64. Ullrich H (2012) Harmonizing patent law: the untamable Union patent. In: Janssens M-C, Van Overwalle G (eds) Harmonisation of European IP law: from European rules to Belgian law and practice. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 243–294Google Scholar
  65. Wen J, Zhou Y, Zhu X (2008) Research on patent fees subsidized by local government in China. In: International conference on information management, innovation management and industrial engineering (ICIII 2008), vol 3, pp 269–274Google Scholar
  66. Woo MYK (1999) Law and discretion in the contemporary Chinese courts. Pac Rim Law Policy J 8:581Google Scholar
  67. Wu X (2015) Why to establish intellectual property courts. Qiushi 11:44–45 (in Chinese: 吴偕林. 为什么要建立知识产权法院?. 求是 11:44–45)Google Scholar
  68. Xiao Y (2003) Courts, judges and judicial reform. Jurist 1:3–10 (in Chinese: 肖扬. 法院、法官与司法改革, 法学家 1:3–10)Google Scholar
  69. Yang J (2016) A practice sample of IP directive precedent regime—the reform of substantiation of trial in Beijing IP Court. Sci Technol Law 2:411 (in Chinese: 杨静 知识产权案例指导制度实践样本-北京知识产权法院庭审实质化诉讼改革 (2016) 2 科技与法律 411)Google Scholar
  70. Yu PK (2013) The curious case of fake Beijing Olympics merchandise. In: Calboli I, Lee E (eds) Trademark protection and territoriality challenges in a global economy. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 259–282Google Scholar
  71. Yu PK (2016) The transplant and transformation of intellectual property laws in China. In: Lee N, Bruun N, Li M (eds) Governance of intellectual property in China and Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 20–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zhang W (2013) The exploitation of new mechanism of intellectual property right adjudication. Mag Natl People’s Congr China 2:30 (in Chinese: 张文学, 知识产权审判的机制探索, 中国人大杂志 2:30)Google Scholar
  73. Zhang L (2016) Recent IP legal reforms in China and the EU in light of implementing IPR strategies. In: Lee N, Bruun N, Li M (eds) Governance of intellectual property in China and Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zhao Y, Bruun N (2016) Chinese developments regarding judicial enforcement mechanisms in intellectual property law. In: Lee N, Bruun N, Li M (eds) Governance of intellectual property in China and Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 318–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Department of Accounting and Commercial LawHanken School of EconomicsHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Postdoctoral Researcher, Doctor of Laws, Faculty of LawUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations