业界新闻：
In this issue
《2025年全球创新指数报告》发布 中国首次跻身全球前十
Global Innovation Index 2025 was Released and China made Global Top 10 for the First Time
2025年9月16日，世界知识产权组织（WIPO）发布了《2025年全球创新指数报告》，中国排名提升至全球第10位，首次跻身全球前十，稳居36个中等偏上收入经济体之首，2013年以来累计上升25位。此外，《报告》显示，中国在创新产出方面长期处于世界前列，优势明显，2025年排名第5位，较2024年上升2位；创新投入排名全球第19位，较2024年上升4位。
On September 16, 2025, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) released the Global Innovation Index 2025, wherein China has improved its global ranking to the 10th place, marking its first entry into the global top 10, and firmly leading the 36 upper-middle-income economies, and has climbed 25 places in total since 2013. Additionally, the report shows that China has long maintained a prominent position in innovation output with significant advantages, ranking 5th in 2025 (up two places from 2024), while its innovation input ranked 19th globally (up four places from 2024).
（来源：中国国家知识产权局）
(Source: CNIPA)
中国香港专利与外观表格于2025年10月1日起更新
Hong Kong, China Updated Forms of Patents and Designs from October 1, 2025
根据香港知识产权署最新公告，自2025年10月1日起，多项专利及外观设计相关表格将更新并正式生效。具体更新内容如下：
According to the latest announcement from the Hong Kong Intellectual Property Department, multiple forms related to patents and designs have been updated and officially took effect on October 1, 2025. The specific updates are as follows:
《2025年专利（一般）（修订）规则》生效后，以下专利表格将启用新版本：
Upon the commencement of the Patents (General) (Amendment) Rules 2025, new versions of the following patent forms have been adopted:
表格P2：用于提交反陈述/反对等程序。
Form P2: for filing counter-statements, oppositions, or related procedures.
表格P6：用于短期专利授予请求。
Form P6: for filing a request for a grant of a short-term patent.
表格OP1：原授标准专利授予请求。
Form OP1: for filing a request for a grant of an original standard patent.
《2025年注册外观设计（修订）规则》生效后，以下外观设计表格将启用新版本：
Upon the commencement of the Registered Designs (Amendment) Rules 2025, a new version of the following design form has been adopted:
表格D9：用于提交反对通知等。
Form D9: for filing a notice of opposition, etc.
2025年10月1日至2026年1月1日为过渡期。在此期间，除部分特定程序外，2025年5月12日公告中指定的旧版表格P2、P6、OP1及D9仍可继续使用。过渡期结束后，新表格将全面取代旧表格。
A transitional period lasts from October 1, 2025 to January 1, 2026. During this period, except certain specific procedures, the old versions of Forms P2, P6, OP1, and D9, as specified in the announcement dated May 12, 2025, may continue to be used. Upon the end of the transitional period, the new forms will completely replace the old ones.
（来源：集佳知识产权）
(Source: UNITALEN)
中国台湾继续试行发明专利再审查加速审查（AEPRe）
Taiwan, China Proceeds with the Trial of the Accelerated Examination Program for Reexamination (AEPRe)
中国台湾地区智慧财产局（TIPO）于2024年9月1日启动发明专利再审查加速审查（AEPRe）试行方案。该方案运行一年间，凭借免规费、手续简便与明确的适用门槛，获得申请人与代理实务界普遍肯定。TIPO据此宣布继续试行。
Intellectual Property Office of Taiwan (TIPO), China launched the trial of the Accelerated Examination Program for Reexamination (AEPRe) on September 1, 2024. Over the course of its one-year trial, the program has been widely recognized by applicants and the intellectual property practitioner community for its fee-free, streamlined procedures and clear eligibility criteria. Based on this, TIPO has announced the continuation of the program's trial.
（来源：集佳知识产权）
(Source: UNITALEN)
典型案例：
Cases in Spotlight
集佳助力兰州新伟公司专利维权双线作战再添胜绩！
Unitalen Secured another Victory in the Dual-Track Battle for Lanzhou Xinwei in Patent Right Protection
兰州新伟车辆装备有限公司（下称“新伟公司”）自主研发的“重力补偿式移动接触网”技术（专利号：ZL202020583993.0）及配套专利“力传递机构、腕臂定位装置及移动接触网”（专利号：ZL202023195929.4）遭被告兰州银利电器设备有限责任公司（下称“银利公司”）在新疆三大铁路专用线工程中非法仿制。面对专利权评价报告不利、被告发起无效宣告等多重挑战，北京市集佳律师事务所以“技术+法律+策略”三位一体的立体化打法，成功扭转战局，为企业赢得关键胜利。
The technology "gravity compensation type mobile contact line" (patent No.: ZL202020583993.0) independently developed by Lanzhou Xinwei Vehicle Equipment Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "Xinwei") and its supporting patent "force transmission mechanism, cantilever positioning device and mobile contact line" (patent No.: ZL202023195929.4) were illegally copied by Lanzhou Yinli Electrical Equipment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Yinli") in the projects of dedicated lines of three major railways in Xinjiang. Facing multiple challenges, including unfavorable patent evaluation reports and invalidation actions filed by the Defendant, Unitalen Law Office employed an integrated "technology + law + strategy" approach that successfully turned the tide, securing a crucial victory for Xinwei.
核心争议与突破
Core Disputes and Breakthroughs
案件初期，国家知识产权局出具的《实用新型专利权评价报告》认定涉案专利“不具备创造性”，直接威胁专利有效性。集佳律师团队接受委托后，迅速启动复议程序成功说服国知局对评价报告进行更正，最终认定涉案专利具备创造性，为后续维权扫清根本障碍。
Initially, the Evaluation Reports of Patent for Utility Model issued by the CNIPA stated that the patents involved "lacked inventiveness", directly threatening the validity of the patents. After accepting the entrustment, Unitalen's attorney team promptly initiated a reconsideration procedure and successfully persuaded the CNIPA to correct the evaluation reports, thereby ultimately affirming the inventiveness of the involved patents and removing the fundamental obstacles to subsequent patent enforcement.
在侵权诉讼审理过程中，被告银利公司向国家知识产权局复审与无效审理部提起无效宣告请求。集佳律师团队提前预判风险，主动对专利权利要求进行关键性修改，维持专利权有效的同时形成更严密的保护范围。两案的无效决定均认定，在权利要求修改的基础上，维持专利权有效。
During the trial of the infringement litigation, Yinli, the Defendant, filed an invalidation request with the Reexamination and Invalidation Department of the CNIPA. Unitalen's attorney team anticipated this risk and proactively made crucial amendments to the patent claims, maintaining the patents' validity while expanding their scope of protection. Both invalidation decisions upheld the patents' validity under the amended claims.
尽管在无效审查决定尚未作出前，鉴于权利要求的保护范围已发生变化，兰州中院认定被诉侵权产品落入ZL202020583993.0专利权修改后的权利要求的保护范围，认定侵权成立。
Although the invalidation decision was still pending, given that the scope of protection of claims had changed, Lanzhou Intermediate Court determined that the accused infringing products fell within the scope of protection of the amended claims of patent ZL202020583993.0 and constituted infringement.
兰州中院认定被诉侵权产品落入ZL202023195929.4专利权权利要求的保护范围，认定侵权成立。二审中银利公司提起无效请求，而无效决定中维持专利权有效，为专利权人继续推进侵权诉讼提供了有力支持。
Lanzhou Intermediate Court also found that the accused infringing products fell within the scope of protection of patent ZL202023195929.4 and constituted infringement. In the second instance, Yinli filed a request for invalidation, but the invalidation decision upheld the patent's validity, providing strong support for the patentee to proceed with the infringement litigation.
同时，为防止被告转移资产、逃避赔偿责任，集佳律师团队在诉讼过程中向兰州中院申请财产保全，成功冻结被告名下多个银行账户，最大限度维护了客户的合法权益。
Meanwhile, to prevent the Defendant from transferring assets and evading compensation, Unitalen's attorney team applied to the Lanzhou Intermediate Court for property preservation during the litigation, successfully freezing several of the Defendant's bank accounts and maximizing protection of the client's legitimate rights.
除民事诉讼外，新伟公司同步向兰州市知识产权局提起专利侵权行政查处请求。集佳律师团队协助行政机关认定：银利公司制造的移动接触网产品完全落入ZL202023195929.4号专利保护范围；银利公司制造、销售行为构成专利侵权。最终，兰州市知识产权局责令银利公司立即停止侵权，形成司法与行政双轨制保护的强大威慑力。
Apart from civil litigation, Xinwei also filed an administrative request for investigating and prosecuting patent infringement with the Lanzhou Intellectual Property Office. Unitalen's attorney team assisted the administrative authority in determining that the mobile contact line product manufactured by Yinli fell entirely within the scope of protection of patent No. ZL202023195929.4, and that Yinli's acts of manufacture and sales constituted patent infringement. Finally, the Lanzhou Intellectual Property Office ordered Yinli to cease infringement immediately. This established a powerful deterrent through dual-track protection combining judicial and administrative measures.
判决亮点
Case Highlights
法院认定被告制造、销售、许诺销售行为构成专利侵权，判令立即停止侵权。支持原告204万元经济赔偿诉求，并酌定16万余元合理维权费用。本案为铁路电气化设备领域"司法+行政双线维权成功"的典型案例，彰显企业知识产权保护的立体化优势。
The court ascertained that the Defendant's acts of making, selling, and offering to sell constituted patent infringement and ordered an immediate cessation of infringement. The court also supported the Plaintiff's claim for RMB 2.04 million in economic compensation and awarded over RMB 160,000 for reasonable enforcement expenses. This case serves as a typical example of "successful dual track enforcement through judicial and administrative measures" in the field of railway electrification equipment, highlighting the comprehensive advantages of intellectual property protection for enterprises.
行业启示
Industry Insights
本案为科技企业维权提供范本。专利布局方面，核心专利需构建"权利要求护城河"，预留修改空间。风险应对方面，遭遇不利评价报告时，应主动通过复议、无效程序寻求翻盘。诉讼策略方面，行政查处与民事诉讼双线并行，最大化维权效率与威慑力；财产保全前置+技术特征精准比对，形成"攻防兼备"诉讼体系。
This case provides a model for technology companies in patent enforcement. In terms of patent portfolio strategy, core patents should establish a "moat of claims" and leave room for amendments. In risk management, when facing unfavorable evaluation reports, companies should take proactive steps, such as reconsideration and invalidation procedures, to reverse unfavorable outcomes. In terms of litigation strategy, administrative investigation and prosecution, and civil litigation should be conducted in parallel to maximize enforcement efficiency and deterrence. Pre-emptive property preservation combined with precise technical feature comparisons forms a comprehensive litigation system that "integrates offensive and defensive strategies".
全国首例涉及确认数据知识产权登记证书效力不正当竞争纠纷案
First Case in China Involving Validity Confirmation of Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificates in Anti-Unfair Competition Dispute
案情摘要
Case Brief
原告数某（北京）科技股份有限公司（简称数某公司）经合法授权收集了涉案1505小时中文普通话语音数据集并登记取得《数据知识产权登记证》，其主张被告隐某（上海）科技有限公司（简称隐某公司）未经许可公开数某公司200小时子集数据集（简称涉案数据集合）的行为构成不正当竞争。
The Plaintiff Shu X (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Shu X"), having lawfully obtained authorization, collected a Mandarin Chinese speech dataset totaling 1,505 hours involved in the case and registered it with a Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate. Shu X claimed that the Defendant Yin X (Shanghai) Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Yin X") publicly released a 200-hour subset of Shu X's dataset (hereinafter referred to as the "involved dataset") without permission, constituting unfair competition.
一审法院认为，涉案数据集合构成商业秘密，隐某公司披露、使用行为侵害数某公司商业秘密，判决其赔偿102300元。隐某公司不服提起上诉。
The court of first instance ruled that the dataset involved in the case constituted a trade secret, and Yin X's disclosure and use of it infringed Shu X's trade secret, ordering compensation of RMB 102,300. Yin X appealed against the judgment.
二审法院认为，《数据知识产权登记证》作为数某公司享有财产性利益及数据来源合法的初步证据；虽然涉案数据集合因公开不符合商业秘密要件，且不符合汇编作品的构成要件，但涉案数据集系数某公司投入大量技术、资金和劳动后形成的具有商业价值的数据条目，其合法权益受反不正当竞争法保护。数据需求方使用开源数据需遵循开源协议，隐某公司未遵守相关协议，违背商业道德，损害数某公司权益及市场竞争秩序，违反反不正当竞争法第二条规定。二审法院据此调整关于商业秘密的认定，对一审判决结论予以维持。
The court of second instance held that the Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate serves as preliminary evidence of Shu X's lawful ownership and legitimate acquisition of the dataset. Although the involved dataset failed to meet the criteria for a trade secret due to its disclosure and also failed to meet the criteria for a compilation, it comprised commercially valuable data entries formed through significant investment in technology, capital, and labor by Shu X, and its legitimate interests are protected by the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. Data users must comply with the terms of open-source licenses when using open-source data. Yin X failed to comply with the relevant license, thereby violating commercial ethics, harming Shu X's interests and competitive market order, and violating Article 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. Accordingly, the court of second instance adjusted the finding on trade secrets but upheld the ruling of the court of first instance.
典型意义
Typical Significance
本案首次阐明数据知识产权登记证书对权益主体和来源合法性的初步证据效力，并通过合理准确界定数据要素各参与方的权利和义务，积极回应了理论和实践的关切。本案生效判决既契合国家促进数据流通利用的政策目标，亦维护了数据服务领域的公平竞争秩序。
This case is the first to affirm the preliminary evidentiary effect of Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificates on rights ownership and acquisition legitimacy and to actively address theoretical and practical concerns by reasonably and accurately defining the rights and obligations of all participants in the data ecosystem. The final judgment aligns with national policy objectives to promote data circulation and utilization while maintaining fair competition in the data services sector.
（案例来源：北京法院2024年度知识产权司法保护十大案例）
(Source: Beijing Court 2024 Top 10 IP Judicial Protection Cases)
全国首例经营者集中审查反垄断其他行政行为纠纷案
First Case in China on Administrative Litigation Involving Anti-Monopoly Review of Concentrations between Undertakings
案情摘要
Case Brief
国家市场监督管理总局（被告，简称市监总局）先后收到托某西药业公司（原告，简称托某西公司）、先某药业有限公司（第三人，简称先某公司）自主提交的先某公司收购托某西公司股权案经营者集中申报材料。市监总局审查评估后认为，涉案集中未达到申报标准，但对中国境内巴曲酶注射液市场可能具有排除、限制竞争效果，鉴于先某公司提交的附加限制性条件承诺方案可以有效减少涉案集中对竞争的不利影响，符合中国反垄断法等相关法律法规关于附条件批准的情形，故决定附加限制性条件批准涉案集中。托某西公司不服，申请行政复议。市监总局作出复议决定，维持被诉决定。托某西公司不服复议决定提起诉讼。
State Administration for Market Regulation (the Defendant, hereinafter referred to as SAMR) successively received the market concentration declaration materials submitted by both Tuo X Xi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (the Plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as Tuo X Xi) and Xian X Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (the Third Party, hereinafter referred to as Xian X) regarding Xian X's acquisition of equity in Tuo X Xi. After reviewing and evaluating the materials, SAMR concluded that the involved concentration did not meet the declaration threshold but might have the effect of excluding or restricting competition in the Chinese market for batroxobin injection. Xian X proposed commitments to impose restrictive conditions on the concentration. Considering that these commitments could effectively mitigate adverse effects on competition and meet the criteria for conditional approval under China's Anti-Monopoly Law and other relevant regulations, SAMR approved the concentration under additional restrictive conditions. Tuo X Xi disagreed and filed for administrative reconsideration, but SAMR upheld its original decision in the reconsideration decision. Tuo X Xi disagreed with the reconsideration decision and filed a lawsuit.
一审法院认为，本案涉及未达申报标准的“自愿申报”情形，执法机关可对“可能具有排除、限制竞争效果”的集中行为进行实质审查。审查决定对集中后的申报人托某西公司施加了法定义务，托某西公司具有提起行政诉讼的诉的利益。经营者集中审查执法的目的，主要是解决因集中而产生的竞争问题，而非解决集中前已经存在的竞争问题。巴曲酶注射液市场竞争状况在经营者集中前已存在，不是涉案审查所关注的对象。对于具有或者可能具有排除、限制竞争效果的经营者集中，国务院反垄断执法机构并非当然禁止。经评估，涉案承诺方案具备有效性、可行性、及时性，能够有效减少集中对竞争产生的不利影响，被诉决定及复议决定正确。据此判决驳回托某西公司的诉讼请求。一审宣判后，各方当事人均未上诉，判决已生效。
The court of first instance concluded that the present case concerned a "voluntary declaration" in which the declaration threshold was not met, allowing the regulatory authority to conduct a substantive review of concentration activities that "might have the effect of excluding or restricting competition". The review decision imposed legal obligations on the post-concentration declarant Tuo X Xi, and thus Tuo X Xi had the standing to file an administrative lawsuit. The objective of the concentration review and enforcement of undertakings primarily lies in addressing competition issues arising from the concentration, rather than pre-existing competition issues. The competitive landscape in the market for batroxobin injection existed before the concentration and was not the focus of the review in this case. The State Council's anti-monopoly regulatory authority does not automatically prohibit concentrations that cause or might cause exclusionary or restrictive effects. After assessment, the proposed commitments were effective, feasible, and timely, and could effectively mitigate the negative impact of concentration on competition. The sued decision and the reconsideration decision were lawful. Based on this, the court dismissed Tuo X Xi's claims. No appeals were filed after the first-instance judgment, and the judgment has entered into force.
典型意义
Typical Significance
本案系全国首例针对经营者集中申报所作行政复议决定提起的行政诉讼，首次对涉案反垄断行政行为是否可诉、经营者集中审查内容、附加限制性条件方案评估方法等问题作出明确认定，为经营者集中申报人、反垄断执法机构提供了较为清晰的行为指引，对同类型案件审理具有较强的示范意义。
As the first administrative lawsuit in China against an administrative reconsideration decision on the declaration of concentrations between undertakings, the present case provides explicit clarification on issues, including whether the anti-monopoly administrative behavior involved is subject to litigation, the scope of review of concentrations between undertakings, and the evaluation criteria for additional restrictive conditions. It also provides clear guidance for both the declaring parties of concentrations and the anti-monopoly regulatory authority, and serves as a firm reference for the adjudication of similar cases.
（案例来源：北京法院2024年度知识产权司法保护十大案例）
(Source: Beijing Court 2024 Top 10 IP Judicial Protection Cases)
集佳新闻：
Unitalen News
集佳派多名律师参加2025 AIPPI 世界知识产权大会
Unitalen Attorneys Attend 2025 AIPPI World Intellectual Property Congress
2025年9月13日-16日，国际保护知识产权协会（AIPPI）第128届世界知识产权大会在日本横滨盛大举行。集佳作为AIPPI会员单位，由常务副所长李德山、副所长李洋以及赵雷、郑毅、潘炜、李兵、王培超、王晓丹、Gordiano、张俊杰等多位合伙人、顾问和律师组成代表团深度参与了本次盛会。
From September 13 to 16, 2025, the 128th World Intellectual Property Congress of the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) was grandly held in Yokohama, Japan. Unitalen, as a member of AIPPI, sent a delegation to participate deeply in this event. The delegation included Chief Vice President Dr. Deshan Li, Vice-President Yang Li, as well as partners, counsels, and attorneys, including Ray Lei Zhao, Yi Zheng, Dr. Wei Pan, Bing Li, Peichao Wang, Xiaodan Wang, Gordiano, and Junjie Zhang.
本届大会以“知识产权驱动全球创新与可持续发展”为主题，吸引来自120多个国家和地区的3000余名知识产权专家、学者及业界领袖参加。李德山副所长作为AIPPI中国分会理事，参加执行委员会全体会议，对AIPPI的各项决议进行表决。
Under the theme "IP-driven Global Innovation and Sustainable Development", this year's congress attracted over 3,000 intellectual property experts, scholars, and industry leaders from more than 120 countries and regions. Unitalen's Vice President Dr. Deshan Li, as a council member of the AIPPI China National Group, attended the Plenary Session of the Executive Committee and voted on various AIPPI resolutions.
集佳连续第三年荣登“北京民营企业文化产业百强”榜单 排名大幅提升
Unitalen Ranked in the "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Cultural Industry" List for the Third Consecutive Year with Significant Ranking Leap
2025年9月19日，北京市工商业联合会重磅发布“2025北京民营企业百强榜单”。北京集佳知识产权代理有限公司连续第三年荣登“北京民营企业文化产业百强”榜，位列第30位，较上年排名大幅提升32个名次。
On September 19, 2025, the Beijing Federation of Industry & Commerce officially released the "2025 Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises List". Unitalen Attorneys at Law ranked in the "Beijing Top 100 Private Enterprises in Cultural Industry" list, marking its third consecutive year of recognition. This year, Unitalen Attorneys at Law secured 30th place, representing a significant rise of 32 places from the previous year.
集佳合伙人赵雷律师应邀出席德国巴伐利亚国际商标协会2025年会并发表演讲
Unitalen Partner Ray Lei Zhao was Invited to Speak at the 2025 BITMA Annual Conference in Germany
当地时间2025年9月20日-21日，德国巴伐利亚国际商标协会（BITMA）2025年会在德国慕尼黑举行，来自多个国家和地区的律所合伙人以及德国本地企业代表参加。集佳合伙人赵雷律师受邀出席会议并作“中国司法实践中对商标混淆可能性的认定”主题演讲。
From September 20 to 21, 2025 (local time), the Bavarian International Trademark Association (BITMA) held its 2025 Annual Conference in Munich, Germany, bringing together law firm partners from multiple countries and regions as well as representatives from local German enterprises. Unitalen partner Ray Lei Zhao was invited to attend the conference and delivered a keynote speech titled "Assessment of Likelihood of Confusion in Trademarks in Chinese Judicial Practice".
.jpg)