To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
IP News
CNIPA Issued the Notice of Approving Three Foreign Patent Agencies to Set Up Permanent Representative Offices in China
批准 知识产权 局 发布 《批准 3 家 外国 专利 代理 在 在 中国 设立 常驻
Date: 2022-05-23
知识产权 批准 批准 法国 利维 知识产权 公司 广州 、 法国 诺华 股份有限公司 股份有限公司 广州 北
The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has approved the establishment of the Guangzhou Representative Office of Levy Intellectual Property Company, the Guangzhou Representative Office of Novartis Technologies Ltd. and the Suzhou Representative Office of Northway Patent Agency Ltd.
Data source: CNIPA (https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2022/5/23/art_75_175701.html)
The SPC Released the Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on Strengthening Blockchain Application in the Judicial Field
发布 《最高人民法院 关于
Date: 2022-05-25
共 意见》 包括 部分 共 条 条 条 链 链 应用 人民法院 链 平台 平台 要求25 、 服务 经济 等 四个 方面 场景 应用 ， 明确 区块 链 应用 保障。 该 意见 具有 以下 特点 是 是 ： 第一 建成 25 25 25 25 2025人民法院 社会 社会 共享 的 区块 链 ， 中国 特色 特色 世界 的 司法 司法 领域 人民法院能力 支持 当事人 等 对 对 司法 数据 真伪 核验 展开 第三 ， 提出 运用 链 数据 数据 篡改 技术 提升 链 存 证质量 ； ， 提出 应用 区块 链 优化 业务 司法 效率 效率 为 多元 纠纷 与 典型 典型 场景 支持 支持 链， 提出 利用 互信 服务 经济 社会 构建 区块 链
The Opinion made up of 32 sections in parts clarify the overall requirements for the application of blockchain application in the judicial field and requirements for building the blockchain platforms of the people’s courts; chart courses for four typical application scenarios where blockchain technology facilitates the enhancement of judicial credibility, judicial efficiency, judicial collaboration, and economic and social governance; and specify safety measures for blockchain application. The has the following key points: First, building a judicial blockchain alliance featuring interconnectivity and sharing. By 2025, a blockchain alliance featuring interconnectivity and sharing between the people’s courts and all social sectors will be built, fostering a world-leading model of blockchain application in the judicial field with Chinese characteristics. Second, clarifying requirements on building the blockchain platforms of the people’s courts. The promotion of judicial blockchain technology capabilities to support parties and other relevant subjects to verify the authenticity of judicial data. Third, proposing to utilize data tamper-proof technology of blockchain to enhance judicial credibility. Setting sound standards and rules for blockchain-based storage and improving the efficiency and quality of electronic evidence verification. Fourth, proposing to optimize business processes with blockchain application to constantly improve judicial efficiency. Provide support for diversified dispute resolution and five typical application scenarios. Fifth, proposing to leverage blockchain interconnectivity to enhance judicial collaboration. Sixth, proposing to exploit the mutual trustworthiness of the blockchain alliance to facilitate economic and social governance. Building an interoperation collaborative mechanism with blockchain platforms.
Data source: The Supreme People’s Court (https://www.court.gov.cn/zixun-xiangqing-360281.html
Daimler Sued Two Companies for Trademark Infringement and was Awarded 800,000 Yuan in Compensation
获赔 诉 两 公司 商标 获赔 获赔 万元 80
Date: 2022-05-30
戴姆勒 公司 ， ， 同 和 有限公司 (同 和 公司) 、 上海 同 致 汽车 公司 公司 (同 致 公司) 在 未 获得 的 情况 下 、 销售 侵犯， 并 长期 共同 ， 将 将 诉至 法院 ， 请求 判令 同 公司 、 同 公司 立即 立即 停止 ， 共同 赔偿 经济 及 合理 共计 共计 120 ， ，
法院 经 审理 ， 和 和 公司 销售 汽车 配件 上 标识 与 公司 的 商标 构 成 相同 ， ， 现有 不足以 证明 同共计 和 立即 立即 停止 ， ， 刊登 声明 消除 ， 赔偿 勒 勒 公司 经济 共计 共计 共计 80。。 同 和 公司 ， 认为 额 额
知识产权 法院 经 ， 一审 法院 考虑 同 和 公司 存在 侵权 侵权 事实 民事 判赔
Daimler discovered Shanghai Tonghe Auto Parts Co., Ltd. (Tonghe) and Shanghai Tongzhi Auto Parts Co., Ltd. (Tongzhi) had for a long period of time without its permission produced and sold auto parts that infringed its trademark and jointly infringed. Daimler sued them and requested that Tonghe and Tongzhi be ordered to immediately stop the infringement and jointly compensate for economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling 1.2 million yuan.
The first instance court held that the logo on the auto parts sold by Tonghe was identical to Daimler’s trademark, but the available evidence was not sufficient to prove that Tongzhi and Tonghe had jointly infringed. In the end, the first instance court ruled that Tonghe should immediately cease trademark infringement, publish a statement to eliminate the impact of its activities, and compensate Daimler for economic damages and reasonable expenses totaling 800,000 Yuan. Tonghe appealed against the judgment, arguing that the amount of compensation was too high.
After hearing the case, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court held that the amount of civil damages awarded by the court of first instance was not abnormally high considering the facts of infringement by Tonghe and upheld the amount of damages awarded at first instance.
Data source: Shanghai Intellectual Property Court (https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/UTaNQeFUkps5nNnium1reA)
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Intellectual Property from China
.