Search

Region
Country
Firm
Author
Date
to
Keywords
Search

Newsletter - October 2023 - English and Chinese

Unitalen Attorneys at Law China


业界新闻:

《中国与共建一带一路国家十周年专利统计报告(2013-2022年)》于近日发布

A Patent Statistics Report of 10 Years (2013-2022) Covering China and the Participating Countries of the "Belt and Road Initiative" (BRI) Recently Released

在习近平总书记提出共建一带一路倡议10周年之际,国家知识产权局于近日发布《中国与共建一带一路国家十周年专利统计报告(2013-2022年)》。

On the occasion of the 10th anniversary for the BRI put forward by General Secretary Xi Jinping, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has recently released A Patent Statistics Report of 10 Years (2013-2022) Covering China and the Participating Countries of the "Belt and Road Initiative".

报告显示:

The report reveals that:

中国与共建国家专利布局实现双向增长。十年来,中国申请人共在50个共建国家申请了专利,累计专利申请公开量达6.7万件,年均增速为25.8%,累计专利授权量达3.5万件,年均增速为23.8%。共有115个共建国家在华提交专利申请,在华专利申请量和授权量分别达25.3万件和11.2万件,年均增速为5.4%9.8%,分别高于同期国外在华专利申请量和授权量整体增速2.95.6个百分点。

China has shared two-way patenting growth with the participating countries. In the past 10 years, Chinese applicants filed patent applications in 50 participating countries, which published 67,000 applications from China and granted 35,000 patents with average annual growth rates of 25.8% and 23.8% respectively. 115 participating countries filed patent applications in China, scoring 253,000 patent applications and 112,000 granted patents with average annual growth rates of 5.4% and 9.8% respectively, which are 2.9 and 5.6 percentage points higher than the overall growth rate of the number of foreign patent applications and grants in China during the same period respectively.

(来源:中国国家知识产权局网站)

(Source: website of the CNIPA)

《关于实用新型专利保护客体判断的指引》发布

Guidelines for Judging the Object of Utility Model Patent Protection Released

为深入贯彻落实《十四五国家知识产权保护和运用规划》任务部署,加强知识产权源头保护,强化知识产权申请注册质量监管,引导创新主体准确理解实用新型专利保护客体的边界,促进实用新型专利申请撰写和答复质量的提高,推动实用新型专利制度高质量发展,中国国家知识产权局组织编写了《关于实用新型专利保护客体判断的指引》,供相关创新主体参考使用。

In order to thoroughly and earnestly implement the tasks and deployment of the National Intellectual Property Protection and Use Plan for the 14th Five-Year Plan Period on strengthening the source protection of intellectual property, intensifying the quality supervision of intellectual property application for registration, guiding the innovation subjects to accurately understand the boundaries of the object of utility model patent protection, promoting the improvement of the qualities of the drafting and replying of the patent applications for utility model, and pushing forward the high-quality development of the utility model patent system, the CNIPA has organized compilation of the Guidelines for Judging the Object of Utility Model Patent Protection for the reference of relevant innovation subjects.

附:《关于实用新型专利保护客体判断的指引》

Attached: Guidelines for Judging the Object of Utility Model Patent Protection

来源:中国国家知识产权局政务微信)

(Source: CNIPA Official WeChat Account)

《关于外观设计国际注册申请的指引》发布

Guidelines on the Application for International Registration of Designs Released

为深入贯彻落实《十四五国家知识产权保护和运用规划》任务部署,加强知识产权源头保护,强化知识产权申请注册质量监管,助力创新主体高效合理使用海牙体系开展全球产品布局,促进外观设计创新能力提升,中国国家知识产权局组织编写了《关于外观设计国际注册申请的指引》,供相关创新主体参考使用。

In order to thoroughly and earnestly implement the tasks and deployment of the National Intellectual Property Protection and Use Plan for the 14th Five-Year Plan Period on strengthening the source protection of intellectual property, intensifying the quality supervision of intellectual property application for registration, helping the innovation subjects efficiently and reasonably use the Hague System to carry out the global product layout, and promoting the enhancement of the innovation capability of designs, the CNIPA has organized compilation of the Guidelines on the Application for International Registration of Designs for the reference of relevant innovation subjects.

附:《关于外观设计国际注册申请的指引》

Attached: Guidelines on the Application for International Registration of Designs

(来源:中国国家知识产权局政务微信)

(Source: CNIPA Official WeChat Account)

中国国家知识产权局-欧洲专利局关于专利合作条约国际检索单位试点项目延期的联合公报

CNIPA-European Patent Office (EPO) Joint Communiqué: Pilot Program of International Searching Authority (ISA) under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Extended

中国专利申请人可继续选择欧洲专利局作为国际检索单位

Chinese patent applicants will continue to have the option to select the EPO as their ISA

中华人民共和国的国民和居民按照专利合作条约(PCT)以英文提交的国际申请可继续选择欧洲专利局作为国际检索单位至20261130日。该试点项目自202012月成功启动,根据中国国家知识产权局和欧洲专利局达成的共识,项目将延期三年。

Nationals and residents of the People's Republic of China will continue to have the option to select the EPO as their ISA for international applications filed in English under the PCT until November 30, 2026. This follows the success of the pilot program first started in December 2020, which is being extended for a further three years as mutually agreed between the CNIPA and the EPO.

(来源:中国国家知识产权局网站)

(Source: website of the CNIPA)

中日专利审查高速路(PPH)试点项目延长

CNIPA and Japan Patent Office (JPO) Extend Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Pilot Program

经中国国家知识产权局和日本特许厅的共同决定,将中日PPH试点项目自2023111日起延长五年,至20281031日结束。参与本试点项目的要求和流程继续沿用中日PPH指南。

The CNIPA and the JPO have jointly decided to extend their PPH pilot program for another five years from November 1, 2023 to October 31, 2028. The requirements for and procedures of participating in the present pilot program shall continue to follow the CNIPA-JPO PPH Guidelines.

(来源:中国国家知识产权局网站)

(Source: website of the CNIPA)

中沙专利审查高速路(PPH)试点项目延长

CNIPA and Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property (SAIP) Extend PPH Pilot Program

经中国国家知识产权局和沙特知识产权局的共同决定,将自2023111日起无限期延长中沙PPH试点项目,参与本试点项目的要求和流程继续沿用中沙PPH指南。

The CNIPA and the SAIP have jointly decided to extend their PPH pilot program for an infinite period of time from November 1, 2023. The requirements for and procedures of participating in the present pilot program shall continue to follow the CNIPA-SAIP Guidelines.

(来源:中国国家知识产权局网站)

(Source: website of the CNIPA)

 

 

典型案例:

集佳助力德国著名创新公司维权胜利并获赔100万元

Unitalen Helping Famous German Innovative Company Win in Rights Protection and Gain Compensation of 1 Million Yuan

总部位于德国的斐得洛扣有限公司(Fidlock GmbH)是全球紧固系统产品的主要供应商。近日,在FIDLOCK公司和由合伙人武树辰律师,专利律师文桦卿及郑海洋组成的集佳诉讼团队的努力下,Fidlock公司起诉被告某服装配件辅料公司侵害发明专利权的案件,在深圳中级人民法院再次获得胜诉。在此之前,集佳已成功代理Fidlock公司针对该被告在深圳中级人民法院、最高人民法院的关联案件中取得胜诉结果。至此,集佳代理Fidlock公司在中国地区的司法和行政知识产权维权行动保持全面胜利。

Fidlock GmbH, headquartered in Germany, is a major supplier of fastening system products worldwide. Recently, with the efforts of FIDLOCK and the Unitalen Litigation Team consisting of partner and attorney WU Shuchen, patent attorneys WEN Huaqing and ZHENG Haiyang, Fidlock won again in the lawsuit against the defendant, a garment accessory company for infringement over a patent for invention, at the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court. Prior to this, Unitalen had successfully represented Fidlock and won the case in an associated case against the defendant at the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court and the Supreme People's Court. By now, Unitalen's representation of Fidlock in the judicial and administrative IP rights defense actions in China has maintained a complete victory.

基本案情

Case Brief

Fidlock基于全球独家的技术提供原创、用户友好的紧固系统,该系统彻底改变了市场及其传统解决方案,将磁扣件的优势与机械锁定功能的优势结合在一起。为保护上述技术创新,Fidlock在包括中国在内的众多国家针对相关技术成果申请了一系列专利。为了维护自身合法权益,制止仿冒行为,Fidlock公司进行了一系列的维权行动。

Fidlock provides an original and user-friendly fastening system using a globally exclusive technology, which has completely changed the market and traditional solutions, combining the advantages of magnetic fasteners and that of mechanical locking. To protect the above-mentioned technological innovation, Fidlock has acquired a series of patents for the related technology in many countries including China. In order to protect its legitimate rights and interests and stop the imitation behavior, Fidlock has carried out a series of actions to protect its rights.

本次案件中被告为福建某知名服装配件公司,主要从事服装配件的设计开发、生产和销售,拥有大型模具制作加工中心以及五金拉链生产基地,系列产品达到上万种,广泛用于服装、鞋帽、箱包、家纺等轻工产品上,其产品远销欧美、东南亚、中东等六十多个国家和地区,同时在国内各大中城市设有近百家销售网点。

The defendant in this case is a well-known garment accessory company in Fujian, mainly engaged in the design and development, and production and sales of garment accessories, owns large-scale mold production and processing centers as well as hardware zipper production bases to produce tens of thousands of kinds of series products, widely used in clothing, shoes, hats, bags, home textiles and other light industrial products. Its products are exported to Europe, America, Southeast Asia, the Middle East and other more than sixty countries and regions. At the same time, there are nearly one hundred sales outlets in the domestic large and medium-sized cities.

FIDLOCK公司于2021年上半年委托由合伙人武树辰律师,专利律师文桦卿及郑海洋组成的集佳诉讼团队,在深圳中级人民法院针对该服装配件公司生产的多款侵权产品提起了多件专利侵权诉讼。

In the first half of 2021, FIDLOCK entrusted the Unitalen Litigation Team, consisting of partner and attorney WU Shuchen and patent attorneys WEN Huaqing and ZHENG Haiyang, to file several patent infringement lawsuits with the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court against various infringing products manufactured by the garment accessory company.

案件评析

Case Analysis

本案的主要难点在于如何在法定赔偿的范围内获得较高的判赔额。集佳诉讼团队全面研究被告的销售模式以及合作对象,提交多组证据,用以证明被告销售被诉侵权产品随单价较低但范围极广,数量极大。最终,人民法院综合考量:涉案专利为发明专利且权利稳定,被告的侵权行为包括制造和销售,被告分销商的情况以及互联网平台上销售商销售被控侵权产品以及关联产品的情况等因素,认为上述信息显示被告销售被诉侵权产品的范围较广、被诉侵权产品虽然单价较低但被告的分销商在销售被诉侵权产品时起售数量较高等侵权行为的性质和情节,酌情判决被告赔偿原告经济损失和合理支出共计100万元。

The main issue in this case is how to obtain a relatively high amount of compensation within the scope of legal compensation. Unitalen's litigation team comprehensively studied the defendant's sales pattern and cooperative partners, and submitted several sets of evidence to prove that the defendant's sales of the sued infringing products cover an extremely wide scope and large quantity, in spite of a low unit price. In the end, the People's Court took into account the fact that the patent involved is a patent for invention and the rights are stable, and the infringing behavior of the defendant included manufacture and sales, as well as the factors such as the situation of the defendant's distributors, the sale situation of the sued infringing products and the associated products by the retailers on the internet platforms, and the like, and held that the above information indicated the nature and situation of the infringing behaviors that the defendant's sale of the sued infringing products covered a wide range, and that the minimum quantity was relatively high when the sued infringing products were sold by the retailers of the defendant, in spite of a low unit price of the sued infringing products. It was appropriately judged that the defendant should compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling 1 million Yuan.

乐心被认定为智能手环上的未注册驰名商标,被告超范围使用注册商标构成侵权

"乐心(LIFESENSE)" Was Recognized as an Unregistered Well-Known Trademark on "Smart Bracelets", the Defendant's "Out of Scope" Use of the Registered Trademark Constituted Infringement

基本案情

Case Brief

(一)原告乐心医疗及主要诉求

(I) The plaintiff Transtek Medical and main requests

原告广东乐心医疗电子股份有限公司(以下简称乐心医疗2002年成立, 2011年,乐心医疗开始创立自有品牌乐心,正式进入国内智能健康领域,主营健康秤、血压计、智能手环、智能手表,2015年第四季度,乐心首次超越苹果,成为中国仅次于小米的可穿戴设备第二大品牌,201611月在深交所上市。

Guangdong Transtek Medical Electronics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Transtek Medical"), the plaintiff, was established in 2002. In 2011, the Transtek Medical started to create its own brand "Lifesense (乐心)" and formally entered the domestic smart health field, mainly engaging in health scales, sphygmomanometers, smart bracelets, and smart watches. In the fourth quarter of 2015, Lifesense for the first time surpassed Apple and became the second largest brand of wearable devices in China next only to Xiaomi, and was listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange in November 2016.

乐心医疗自20118月开始,即在健康秤、血压计上使用乐心商标,但商标申请、注册日期较晚:第9等商品上的乐心商标,20114月申请、20125月获准注册,第10血压计等商品上的乐心商标,20143月申请、20169月获准注册。乐心医疗20138月推出乐心智能手环,20146月推出乐心智能手表,并在中国可穿戴设备市场迅速占有一席之地;但是,在智能可穿戴产品通常注册的第90901群组,原告乐心注册商标指定商品为仅为智能戒指、智能眼镜、腕带式智能电话等智能终端,并不包括智能手环智能手表。在一审中,乐心医疗要求认定乐心注册商标在第9类秤、第10类血压计上驰名,并跨类保护;同时主张乐心在智能手环商品上构成未注册驰名商标。

Transtek Medical has been using the trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" on health scales and sphygmomanometers since August 2011, but applied for registration of the trademark later: applied for the trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" on "scales" and other goods in Class 9 in April 2011 and gained the approval for registration in May 2012; applied for the trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" "sphygmomanometers" and other goods in Class 10 in March 2014 and gained the approval for registration in September 2016. Transtek Medical launched the "Lifesense" smart bracelet in August 2013 and the "Lifesense" smart watch in June 2014, and rapidly had a share in China's wearable device market. However, in Group 0901, Class 9, where smart wearable products are usually registered, the plaintiff's registered trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" designates only smart rings, smart glasses, wristband smart phones and other smart terminals, and does not include "smart bracelets" or "smart watches". In the first trial, Transtek Medical requested that the registered trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" shall be recognized as well-known in Class 9 scales and Class 10 sphygmomanometers and be protected across classes. At the same time, Transtek Medical claimed that "乐心(LIFESENSE)" constituted an unregistered well-known trademark on smart bracelet goods.

(二)被告岩岩贸易及主要抗辩

(II) The defendant Yanyan Trading and main defenses

被告郑州岩岩贸易有限公司(以下简称岩岩贸易2008年成立,201010月申请、201110月获准注册乐心HIIN”商标,核定商品为第14类手表、闹钟、珠宝首饰等商品。

Zhengzhou Yanyan Trading Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Yanyan Trading"), the defendant, was established in 2008, filed application in October 2010, and was approved for registration of the trademark "乐心HIIN" in October 2011, on goods in Class 14 of wristwatches, alarm clocks, Jewelry and other goods.

201910月,原告从被告天猫网店、经营场所公证购买多款乐心HIIN”智能手表、智能手环产品。被告抗辩认为,被告注册商标申请注册及使用在先,被告合法使用自有注册商标,智能手表、智能手环属于自有注册商标的保护范围,不构成商标侵权。

In October 2019, the plaintiff, from the defendant's Tmall online store and business sites purchased with notarization a variety of "乐心HIIN" smart watches and smart bracelet products. The defendant argued that the defendant applied for registration and used the registered trademark priorly, used its own registered trademark legally, and smart watches and smart bracelets belong to the protection scope of its own registered trademark, which do not constitute trademark infringement.

法院判决

Court Judgment

20223月,深圳中院一审判决认为,被诉侵权产品虽然被设计成手表的外形,但透过现象看本质,从产品的实际功能、作用和使用效果来看,其属于手部智能穿戴类商品,而不是仅提供时间功能的手表,故被告关于使用自有注册商标的抗辩不成立。原告在智能手环商品上的乐心未注册商标已为相关公众所熟知,应认定为未注册驰名商标。被诉侵权商品与智能手环本质相同,商标近似,侵害原告未注册驰名商标。在本案认定未注册驰名商标的情况下,已无需再进行注册商标驰名与否、跨类保护的认定。

In March 2022, the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held in the first instance that, although the sued infringing product was designed in the form of a watch, by seeing the essence of the product and from the perspective of the product's actual function, performance and use effect, it belongs to the class of hand-held smart wearable products rather than a watch that only provides time function, and the defendant's defense of using its own registered trademark was thus not established. The plaintiff's unregistered trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" on the smart bracelet goods has been known to the relevant public, and should be recognized as unregistered well-known trademark. The sued infringing goods are essentially the same as the smart bracelet, and the trademarks are similar, infringing the plaintiff's unregistered well-known trademark. In the case that the unregistered well-known trademark is recognized in this case, there is no need to determine whether the registered trademark is well-known or not, and the cross-class protection.

20239月,广东高院二审判决,维持深圳中院关于侵权定性的判决,判赔额酌情降低。二审判决核心观点:

In September 2023, the Guangdong High Court ruled in the second instance to uphold the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court's judgment on the nature of the infringement, and ruled that the amount of compensations should be reduced where appropriate. The key points of the second instance judgment are as follows:

1、关于被告是属于规范使用自有14手表上的注册商标乐心,还是超出核定商品范围的问题,广东高院认为:被诉智能手表,与被告商标核定的手表,并非同类商品,在案证据不足以证明在被诉智能手表商品上,被告存在在先使用的事实,亦无证据显示被告注册商标具有一定知名度,故被告注册商标保护范围不足以延及智能手表、智能手环商品上。被告主张智能手环、智能手表系其注册商标保护范围的意见,缺乏事实和法律依据。

1. Regarding the question whether the defendant's use of its own registered trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" in Class 14 of "watches" was standard or exceeded the scope of the approved goods, the Guangdong High Court held that: the sued smart watch was not the same watch in class of goods that the defendant's trademark was approved for. The evidence on record was insufficient to prove the fact of the defendant's prior use on the goods of the sued smart watch, and there was no evidence to show that the defendant's registered trademark had certain reputation, so the protection scope of the defendant's registered trademark was insufficient to extend to smart watches and smart bracelets. The defendant's argument that smart bracelets and smart watches are covered by the protection scope of its registered trademark lacks factual and legal basis.

2、关于乐心智能手环商品上的未注册驰名商标依据是否充分的问题,广东高院认为:广东乐心公司、深圳乐心公司在201910月之前,在智能手环商品上使用乐心未注册商标已为相关公众所熟知、具有较高的市场知名度、已形成良好声誉的事实依据充分。

2. Regarding the question whether grounds for "乐心(LIFESENSE)" being the unregistered well-known trademark on the goods of "smart bracelet" were sufficient, the Guangdong High Court held there exists sufficient basis for the fact that Guangdong Lifesense and Shenzhen Lifesense's use of the unregistered trademark "乐心(LIFESENSE)" on the goods of "smart bracelet" before October 2019 had been known to the relevant public, had a high degree of market awareness, and had formed a good reputation.

3、关于被诉侵权商品的属性问题,广东高院认为:依据产品说明书和当庭勘验情况,被诉侵权商品主要功能是数据处理、健康监测,需要下载APP才能使用全部功能,被诉侵权商品与14类贵金属合金、首饰、手表等商品,实际功能和使用效果区别明显,一审认定被诉侵权商品与智能手环属同类商品,并无不当。

3. Regarding the attributes of the sued infringing goods, the Guangdong High Court held that: based on the product specification and the situation of inspection in court, the main functions of the sued infringing goods were data processing and health monitoring, and it was necessary to download the APP in order to use all the functions. There was a clear distinction between the sued infringing goods and the goods in Class 14 of precious metals, jewelry, watches and other goods in terms of actual functions and use effects, and that it was not improper to determine that the sued infringing goods belonged to the same class of goods as the smart bracelets in the first instance.

典型意义

Typical Significance

本案是一起通过未注册驰名商标保护《区分表》之外、非规范商品的典型案例。本案通过被诉侵权商品的说明书、现场勘验,以及产品结构、功能的分析,确认被诉侵权商品在商标法意义上的类别、属性,为将来更多涉及多功能组合制成品、复合材料新产品的商标侵权问题,提供了一个值得借鉴的裁判思路。

This case is a typical case of protecting "non-standard goods" excluded in the Classification Tables through an unregistered well-known trademark. The case determines the class and attributes of the sued infringing goods in the sense of trademark law through the specification and on-site inspection of the sued infringing goods, and analysis of the structure and function of the products, which provides a valuable reference for more future adjudication of trademark infringement involving manufactured goods of multi-functional combination and new composite material products.

 

 

集佳新闻:

2023北京民营企业百强“1+4”榜单发布 集佳荣登北京民营企业文化产业百强

2023 Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises "1+4" List Released, Unitalen Ranked among "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Cultural Industry"

近日,北京市工商联召开了2023北京民营企业百强发布会,发布2023北京民营企业百强“1+4”榜单,即北京民营企业百强”“北京民营企业科技创新百强”“北京民营企业文化产业百强”“北京民营企业中小百强北京民营企业社会责任百强

Recently, the Beijing Federation of Industry & Commerce held a news conference on the 2023 Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises, and released the 2023 Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises "1+4" List , i.e., "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises", "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Science and Technology Innovation", "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Cultural Industry", "Beijing Top 100 Private Small and Medium-sized Enterprises" and "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Social Responsibility".

北京集佳知识产权代理有限公司荣登本年度北京民营企业文化产业百强榜,这是集佳首次入选北京民营企业百强榜单。

Unitalen Attorneys At Law ranked in the list of "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Cultural Industry" this year, which is the first time for Unitalen to be selected in the list of Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises.

Unitalen Attorneys at Law



About the Firm

Unitalen Attorneys at Law

Address7th Floor, Scitech Place, No. 22 Jian Guo Men Wai Ave., Beijing, 100004 P. R. China
Tel86-10-5920 8888
Fax86-10-5920 8588
Contact PersonDeshan Li
Emailmail@unitalen.com
Linkwww.unitalen.com


Related Newsletters