中伦文德国际知识产权观察-2024年8月刊 International IP/IT Review Aug. 2024

《专利开放许可实施纠纷调解工作办法（试行）》（下称《办法（试行）》）的适用对象为专利开放许可实施纠纷，包括专利开放许可使用费支付标准和支付方式、专利开放许可生效时间、专利许可期限等问题的纠纷。《办法（试行）》总则中规定专利开放许可实施纠纷调解应遵循自愿、合法、公平、保密四个原则。当事人应当以书面方式提出调解申请，并将调解申请书当面提交或者邮寄至国家知识产权局。

《办法（试行）》规定调解案件的受理以双方当事人同意为基础，由当事人一方提出申请的，国家知识产权局向被申请方当事人发送调解通知书，征询调解意愿，调解过程中一方当事人要求终止的，调解员应当终止调解程序。国家知识产权局应当自受理调解申请之日起30个工作日内完成案件调解。情况复杂或者有其他特殊情形的，经双方当事人同意的，可以适当延长，延长期限不超过30个工作日。

文德短评:

《办法（试行）》体现了国家知识产权局在优化专利纠纷解决机制上的积极探索。通过明确调解原则和程序，该《办法（试行）》旨在为专利开放许可相关纠纷提供更高效的解决途径，减轻司法负担。然而，其调解员的专业性和调解结果的执行力仍是关键挑战。在实践中，该《办法（试行）》的实际效果还有待观察和进一步完善。

The State Intellectual Property Office issued the Measures for Dispute Mediation for the Implementation of Patent Open License (Trial)

The Measures for the Mediation of Disputes over the Implementation of Patent Opening licensing (Trial) (hereinafter referred to as the “Trial Measures”) are applicable to disputes over the implementation of the implementation of patent open licensing, including the payment standard and payment method of patent opening licensing royalties, the effective time of patent opening licensing, the patent licensing period of patent licensing and other issues. The general provisions of the Trial Measures stipulate that the implementation of patent open licensing dispute mediation should follow the four principles of voluntary, legality, fairness and confidentiality. The parties concerned shall submit an application for mediation in writing and submit or mail the application to the State Intellectual Property Office.

The Trial Measures stipulates that the acceptance of a mediation case shall be based on the consent of both parties, and if the application, the State Intellectual Property Office shall send a mediation notice to the party of the application to consult the mediation intention. If one party requests for termination in the mediation process, the mediator shall terminate the mediation procedure. The State Intellectual Property Office shall complete the case mediation within 30 working days from the date of accepting the application for mediation. If the circumstances are complicated or under other special circumstances, with the consent of both parties, the extension period may be extended appropriately and shall not exceed 30 working days.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Trial Measures reflects the active exploration of the State Intellectual Property Office in optimizing the patent dispute resolution mechanism. By clarifying the mediation principles and procedures, the Trial Measures aims to provide a more efficient way to solve disputes related to patent licensing and reduce the judicial burden. However, the professionalism of its mediators and the execution of the mediation results remain the key challenges. In practice, the actual effect of the Trial Measures has yet to be observed and further improved.

《征求意见稿》共八十六条，分为总则、行政裁决、行政调解、法律责任和附则等五章。国家知识产权局称，《办法》（征求意见稿）的制定广泛地征求了学界、实务界与执法部门的意见，在总结以往专利侵权纠纷办案执法实践的基础上，细化完善了专利侵权纠纷行政裁决和调解的办案程序和实体标准。

《征求意见稿》旨在进一步落实了新修改专利法与实施细则，对专利侵权纠纷行政裁决和调解工作的范围、程序和制度进行了优化。《征求意见稿》的亮点在于：（1）落实《专利法》修改内容，设置重大专利侵权纠纷行政裁决、药品专利纠纷早期解决机制行政裁决、专利开放许可实施纠纷的行政调解等有关章节；（2）落实新《专利法实施细则》吸纳骨干内容，细化文书送达方式，明确在调解职务发明创造的发明人、设计人的奖励、报酬纠纷时的调解标准等；（3）援引《重大专利侵权纠纷行政裁决办法》《药品专利纠纷早期解决机制行政裁决办法》有关内容，明确相关行政裁决案件中的认定规则和处理规定；（4）办案规范、办案程序进一步优化，办案人员资质、管辖权及优先管辖、结案方式等规定得到完善。

文德短评:

《征求意见稿》展示了国家知识产权局在完善专利纠纷处理机制上的重大进展。通过广泛征求意见并结合实际执法经验，该《征求意见稿》不仅对新《专利法》的修改内容进行了具体落实，还在裁决与调解的程序规范化方面作出了细致优化。这种系统性的提升有望提高行政裁决的效率和公正性。

The State Intellectual Property Office has solicited public opinions on the Measures for Administrative Adjudication and Mediation of Patent Disputes

The draft for soliciting opinions consists of 86 articles, which are divided into five chapters: general provisions, administrative adjudication, administrative mediation, legal liability and supplementary provisions. According to the State Intellectual Property Office, the formulation of the Measures (draft) has extensively solicited opinions from academia, practice and law enforcement departments, and on the basis of summarizing the previous law enforcement practices of patent infringement disputes, refined and improved the procedures and substantive standards for the handling of administrative adjudication and mediation of patent infringement disputes.

The draft aims to further implement the new revision of the Patent Law and implementation rules, and optimize the scope, procedures and system of administrative adjudication and mediation of patent infringement disputes.

The highlights of the draft are as follows: (1) the implementation of the revision content of the patent law, Set up relevant chapters on administrative adjudication of major patent infringement disputes, administrative adjudication of early settlement mechanism of drug patent disputes, and administrative mediation of disputes over patent opening and license implementation; (2) Implement the new Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law to absorb the backbone contents, Refine the delivery of service, To clarify the mediation standards for the mediation of the inventor and designer of the official invention and creation; (3) Citing the relevant contents of Administrative Adjudication Measures on Major Patent Tort Disputes and Administrative Adjudication Measures for Early Resolution Mechanism of Drug Patent Disputes, Clarifying the identification rules and handling provisions in the relevant administrative adjudication cases; (4) Further optimization of case handling norms and procedures, Provisions on the qualifications, jurisdiction, priority jurisdiction and methods of closing cases have been improved.

ZLWD Commentary：

The draft shows the major progress of the State Intellectual Property Office in improving the mechanism for handling patent disputes. Through extensive soliciting opinions and combining with actual law enforcement experience, the draft for soliciting opinions not only implemented the revision content of the new Patent Law, but also made detailed optimization in the standardization of the ruling and mediation procedures. This systematic improvement is expected to improve the efficiency and impartiality of administrative rulings.

中国版权协会与韩国著作权委员会于7月17日下午在京签署了战略合作协议，旨在加强两国在版权领域的交流合作和传播保护。根据协议，双方将基于平等互利、优势互补、信息共享、共同发展的原则，建立长期交流机制。具体内容包括：在传播合作上，将针对优质版权内容分发方面开展交流与合作，合作内容将涵盖音乐、影视、动漫、文学、游戏、艺术等多个领域，促进中韩正版内容资源的相互传播与合作；且双方将共同推动保护版权内容的正版化工作，努力预防侵权；双方还将建立交流合作机制，如互派高级别的版权代表团，与对方的版权行政机关、行业协会、版权相关企业、研究学术机构开展交流等。

文德短评：

中国版权协会与韩国著作权委员会的战略合作协议标志着中韩两国在版权保护与传播领域合作的进一步深化。此举不仅有助于推动两国优质版权内容的交流与正版化保护，还为版权领域的多元合作提供了广阔空间。双方通过建立长期的交流机制，特别是在音乐、影视等领域的深度合作，将进一步加强两国在全球版权市场中的地位。然而，协议的实际效果将取决于双方在具体执行中的协调与落实。

The Copyright Association of China signed a strategic cooperation agreement to strengthen cooperation in the field of copyright

The Copyright Association of China and the Copyright Commission of South Korea signed a strategic cooperation agreement in Beijing on the afternoon of July 17, aiming to strengthen bilateral exchanges and cooperation and communication protection in the field of copyright. According to the agreement, the two sides will establish a long-term exchange mechanism based on the principles of equality and mutual benefit, complementary advantages, information sharing and common development. 

The specific contents include: in terms of communication and cooperation, communication and cooperation will be carried out for the distribution of high-quality copyright content, including music, film, animation, literature, games, art and other fields to promote mutual communication and cooperation in the protection of copyright content; the parties will establish exchange and cooperation mechanisms, such as exchanging high-level copyright delegations with other copyright administrative organs, industry associations, copyright related enterprises and research and academic institutions.

ZLWD Commentary：

The strategic cooperation agreement between the Copyright Association of China and the Copyright Commission of South Korea marks the further deepening of the cooperation between China and South Korea in the field of copyright protection and communication. The move will not only help promote the exchange and legitimate protection of high-quality copyrighted content between the two countries, but also provide a broad space for diversified cooperation in the field of copyright. The two sides will further strengthen their position in the global copyright market through the establishment of a long-term exchange mechanism, especially the in-depth cooperation in the fields of music, film and television. However, the actual effect of the agreement will depend on the coordination and implementation of both parties in the specific implementation.

本案原告北京数某某公司于2021年发布“AI数据开源计划1505小时中文普通话语音数据”，采集语音数据，并于2023年获得京知数登字第2023000007《数据知识产权登记证》。上海隐某公司是一家提供数据存储、标注、训练服务的科技公司，在通过非法手段获取涉案1505小时数据集的子集涉案200小时数据集后，将其作为公司“格物钛”官网数据产品的服务内容向网络用户披露并提供下载链接使用。北京数某某公司于2021年向北京互联网法院提起诉讼，主张隐某公司侵害数某某公司的数据财产权、著作权和商业秘密，同时构成不正当竞争。

一审北京互联网法院判决商业秘密侵权成立。隐某公司不服决定，提起上诉。近日，北京知识产权法院作出判决，认为虽然涉案数据集既不具有独创性，也在被诉侵权行为发生时已由数某某公司主动公开而丧失秘密性，不能得到著作权和商业秘密保护，但数某某公司在合法收集声音数据条目的过程中付出了技术、资金、人力、物力等实质性投入，在原始数据上添附了更多的商业价值，构成一种竞争性权益。同时，北京知识产权法院确定了涉案《数据知识产权登记证》不仅可作为证明数某某公司享有涉案数据集相关财产性利益的初步证据，同时也能够作为数据集收集行为或数据来源合法的初步证据。法院指出，隐某公司的行为违反了涉案知识共享开源协议的非商业目的使用规则，损害了数某某公司的合法权益及消费者利益，扰乱了数据服务市场竞争秩序，亦构成了不正当竞争行为。最终法院确定一审法院裁定的10万元经济赔偿数额适当。

文德短评 ：

北京知识产权法院审理的这起案件具有开创性意义，标志着我国在数据权益保护领域的法律实践迈出了重要一步。法院通过认定数据的竞争性权益，承认了企业在数据收集和处理中的投入与价值创造，这为数据资产的保护提供了新的法律依据。同时，法院还确认《数据知识产权登记证》作为合法数据来源的初步证据，进一步增强了数据登记的法律效力。然而，如何在未来实践中平衡数据公开与权益保护之间的矛盾，仍是法律界需要继续探索的问题。

Beijing Intellectual Property Court concluded the country's first case of unfair competition involving the data intellectual property registration certificate

In this case, the plaintiff, Beijing Digital XX Company, released the "AI Data Open Source Plan 1505 hours of Chinese Mandarin Voice Data" in 2021, collected voice data, and obtained the 2023000007 "Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate" in 2023. Shanghai Yin Company is a technology company that provides data storage, labeling and training services. After obtaining the 200 hours subset of the 1505 hours of data set through illegal means, it disclosed it to network users as the service content of the official website of the company "Gu Titanium" and provided download links. In 2021, Beijing Digital Company filed a lawsuit in the Beijing Internet Court, claiming that the company infringed on the data property rights, copyright and trade secrets of the company, and constituted unfair competition.

The Beijing Internet Court of first instance ruled the infringement of commercial secrets. Hidden a company against the decision, filed an appeal. Recently, the Beijing intellectual property court ruled, that although the data set involved is neither originality, also in the infringement happened by the number so-and-so company active public and loss of secret, cannot get copyright and trade secrets protection, but the number of so-and-so company in the process of legal collection sound data entry paid substantial technology, capital, manpower, material resources, on the original data with more commercial value, constitute a competitive rights and interests. At the same time, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court determined that the "Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate" involved in the case could not only be used as a prima facie evidence to prove that the company enjoys the property interests related to the involved data set, but also as a prima facie evidence of the data set collection behavior or legal data source. The court pointed out that the behavior of the company violated the rules for the use of the open source agreement, damaged the legitimate rights and interests of the company and the interests of consumers, disturbed the competition order of the data service market, and also constituted unfair competition behavior. Finally, the court determined that the amount of 100,000 yuan awarded by the first-instance court was appropriate.

ZLWD Commentary：

The case heard by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court is of pioneering significance, marking an important step forward in China's legal practice in the field of data rights protection. By identifying the competitive rights and interests of data, the court has recognized the investment and value creation of enterprises in data collection and processing, which provides a new legal basis for the protection of data assets. At the same time, the court also confirmed the Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate as a preliminary evidence of the legal data source, further enhancing the legal effect of data registration. However, how to balance the contradiction between data disclosure and rights and interests protection in the future practice is still a problem that the legal community needs to continue to explore.

7月25日，广西壮族自治区十四届人大常委会第十次会议表决通过了《广西壮族自治区知识产权保护和促进条例》（下称《条例》），该条例计划于10月1日起施行。

《条例》强调了加强知识产权快速协同保护机制的建设，并完善了纠纷多元化解决机制。在传统文化和产业方面，《条例》规定县级以上人民政府知识产权主管部门应与相关部门合作，加强壮瑶医药等中医药、老字号、非物质文化遗产等传统产业和文化领域的知识产权保护与运用，以实现传承和创新发展。

特别值得注意的是，《条例》进一步推动了新领域和新业态知识产权保护规则的建立。自治区人民政府知识产权主管部门将与相关部门建立数据知识产权保护机制，探索数据知识产权登记，并依法保护数据在收集、存储、加工、使用等活动中形成的知识产权，以促进其价值实现。《条例》还支持企业和机构在新一代信息技术、人工智能、航空航天、新能源、新材料、高端装备、生物医药、量子科技等领域建立知识产权保护模式。

此外，《条例》还细化和完善了电商、展会、商业秘密的知识产权保护规则，并支持广西扩大知识产权开放合作，拓宽对外交流合作渠道，建设国际知识产权开放合作平台。这一举措将有助于广西在知识产权保护方面与国际接轨，推动区域经济的创新和发展。

文德短评：

《条例》的通过标志着广西在知识产权保护领域迈出了坚实的一步。《条例》不仅强调了知识产权快速协同保护和多元化纠纷解决机制的建设，还在传统文化和新兴领域的知识产权保护方面做出了创新规定。特别是对数据知识产权的保护和新业态的支持，展示了广西对未来科技发展的敏锐把握。此外，《条例》推动国际合作和开放，助力广西在全球知识产权体系中的融入。

The Standing Committee of the People's Congress of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region voted to pass the Regulations on Intellectual Property Protection and Promotion of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region

On July 25, the 10th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 14th People's Congress of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region voted to pass the Regulations on the Protection and Promotion of Intellectual Property Rights of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which is scheduled to take effect on October 1.

The Regulations emphasize the construction of a mechanism for rapid collaborative protection of intellectual property rights and improve the diversified dispute resolution mechanism. In terms of traditional culture and industries, the Regulations stipulate that the intellectual property departments of the people's governments at or above the county level should cooperate with relevant departments to strengthen the protection and application of intellectual property in traditional industries and cultural fields such as traditional Chinese medicine, time-honored brands and intangible cultural heritage, so as to realize inheritance and innovative development.

It is particularly noteworthy that the Regulations further promote the establishment of intellectual property protection rules in new areas and new forms of business. The competent intellectual property department of the people's government of the Autonomous Region will establish a data intellectual property protection mechanism with relevant departments, explore the registration of data intellectual property, and protect the intellectual property rights formed in the collection, storage, processing and use of data in accordance with the law, so as to promote the realization of its value. The Regulations also support enterprises and institutions to establish intellectual property protection models in new-generation information technology, artificial intelligence, aerospace, new energy, new materials, high-end equipment, biomedicine and quantum technology.

In addition, the Regulations also refine and improve the intellectual property protection rules for e-commerce, exhibitions and trade secrets, and support Guangxi to expand the openness and cooperation in intellectual property, expand channels for foreign exchanges and cooperation, and build an international platform for intellectual property opening and cooperation. This initiative will help Guangxi to integrate with the international standards in intellectual property protection and promote the innovation and development of regional economy.

ZLWD Commentary：

The adoption of the Regulations marks a solid step forward in Guangxi in the field of intellectual property protection. The Regulations not only emphasize the construction of a rapid and coordinated protection of intellectual property rights and a diversified dispute resolution mechanism, but also make innovative provisions on intellectual property protection in traditional culture and emerging fields. In particular, the protection of data intellectual property rights and the support for new business forms show Guangxi's keen grasp of the future development of science and technology. In addition, the Regulations promote international cooperation and opening-up, and help Guangxi's integration into the global intellectual property system.

7月28日，贵阳知识产权法庭在贵阳大数据科创城算力中心正式揭牌。该知识产权法庭是我国西南地区第三家挂牌的知识产权法庭，也是贵州省省目前唯一的知识产权专门审判机构。

案件管辖范围方面，贵阳知识产权法庭负责管辖发生在贵州省辖区内的发明专利、实用新型专利、植物新品种、集成电路布图设计、技术秘密、计算机软件的权属、侵权纠纷以及垄断纠纷第一审知识产权民事、行政案件，和发生在贵阳市辖区内除依法应由基层人民法院管辖之外的第一审知识产权民事、行政和刑事案件，同时受理当事人不服修文县人民法院一审判决、裁定，依法可以提起上诉的知识产权民事、行政二审案件。

文德短评:

贵阳知识产权法庭的成立，是贵州省知识产权保护体系的一项重要里程碑。作为该省首家专门审理知识产权案件的机构，这一法庭不仅填补了贵州在知识产权专门审判领域的空白，还加强了全省知识产权保护的法律保障。其广泛的管辖范围，包括发明专利、计算机软件和垄断纠纷等复杂案件，表明该法庭将肩负起保护创新成果、打击侵权行为的重任。

Guiyang Intellectual Property Court was officially established, which is the first specialized intellectual property judicial institution in Guizhou Province

On July 28th, Guiyang Intellectual Property Court was officially inaugurated in Guiyang Big Data Science and Technology Innovation City Computing Power Center. The intellectual property court is the third listed intellectual property court in southwest China, and also the only specialized intellectual property judicial institution in Guizhou Province.

Case jurisdiction, Guiyang intellectual property court is responsible for the jurisdiction in the jurisdiction of invention patent, utility model patent, plant varieties, integrated circuit layout design, technical secrets, computer software ownership, infringement disputes and monopoly disputes first intellectual property civil and administrative cases, and in Guiyang city jurisdiction except outside the jurisdiction of the grassroots court of first intellectual property civil, administrative and criminal cases, at the same time to accept the parties refuses to accept the county people's court of first instance judgment or ruling, can appeal in accordance with the law of intellectual property rights civil and administrative second instance cases.

ZLWD Commentary：

The establishment of the Guiyang Intellectual Property Court is an important milestone in the intellectual property protection system of Guizhou Province. As the first institution in the province to handle intellectual property cases, this court not only fills the gap in the field of intellectual property adjudication in Guizhou, but also strengthens the legal protection of intellectual property protection in the province. Its broad jurisdiction, including complex cases such as invention patents, computer software and monopoly disputes, suggests that the court will shoulder the responsibility of protecting innovation and combating infringement.

本案是一起关于产品包装设计著作权侵权的案例。小铭作为A公司的经营者，为公司生产的通鼻喷雾设计了外包装，并在2023年2月完成了美术作品著作权登记。不久后，小铭发现B公司在同一电商平台销售的通鼻喷雾包装与其设计高度相似，小铭认为B公司侵犯了其美术作品的复制权、发行权和信息网络传播权，遂向法院提起诉讼。B公司辩称，涉案包装盒和瓶身的图案和形状为市场上常见，不具有独创性，标签上的文字只是产品信息的常规表述，主要用于向消费者说明产品来源及功能，图案部分意在向消费者说明产品用途和使用方式等，也是公有领域已有作品的简单拼凑，亦不具有独创性，因此不构成著作权侵权。

法院审理后认为，小铭的美术作品虽然在元素编排上进行了个性化选择和排列组合，但并未达到著作权法所要求的创作高度。小铭也未能提供诸如作品底稿等证据来证明其作品的独创性。因此，法院判决小铭的作品不属于《著作权法》所规定的作品，驳回了其全部诉讼请求。

法院最后指出，著作权法保护的是具有独创性的智力成果，独创性是作品获得著作权保护的前提条件。我国实行作品自愿登记制度，登记机构对申请人提交的申请文件只作形式审查，人民法院在审判中需要对作品的来源、创作过程以及作品独创性等进行实质审查。具体的审查要点包括有无底稿或原件、发表途径、原作者的思想表述或作品蕴含的审美意义等。

文德短评：

深圳中院关于产品包装设计著作权案的判决，强调了独创性在著作权保护中的核心地位。法院明确指出，仅对产品名称、功效描述等内容进行有限的个性化排列和组合，不足以构成著作权法意义上的独创性，因此不予保护。这一判决传达了著作权保护的严格标准，要求作品必须具备一定的创作高度，而非简单的元素拼凑。对创作者而言，这一案例提醒他们在追求著作权保护时，必须确保作品具有独特的创意和原创性，才能获得法律的认可。

Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court: The limited personalized selection and permutation combination of product name, efficacy description and other contents do not meet the requirements of originality, and we cannot obtain copyright protection

This case is a case of copyright infringement of product packaging design. As the operator of the A company, Xiao Ming designed the outer packaging for the nasal spray produced by the company, and completed the copyright registration of the art works in February 2023. Soon after, Xiao Ming found that the nasal spray packaging sold by B company on the same e-commerce platform was highly similar to its design. Xiao Ming believed that B company had violated the right of reproduction, distribution and information network transmission of his art works, so he filed a lawsuit to the court. B company argued that the box and bottle involved common pattern and shape for the market, not original, the text on the label is the conventional expression of product information, mainly used to consumers product source and function, design part to consumers product use and use, is also the public existing works simple piece together, also does not have originality, so does not constitute a copyright infringement.

After hearing the trial, the court held that although Xiao Ming's fine art works were personalized and arranged in the element arrangement, they did not reach the creative height required by the copyright law. Xiao Ming also failed to provide evidence such as his manuscript to prove the originality of his work. Therefore, the court ruled that Xiao Ming's works did not belong to the works stipulated in the Copyright Law, and rejected all his claims.

The court finally pointed out that the copyright law protects the original intellectual achievements, and the originality is the prerequisite for the works to obtain the copyright protection. China implements a voluntary registration system for works. The registration authorities only examine the application documents submitted by the applicant, and the people's court needs to conduct substantive examination of the source of the works, the creation process and the originality of the works in the trial. The specific key points of the review include the bottomless manuscript or the original, the way of publication, the original author's thoughts or the aesthetic meaning contained in the work.

ZLWD Commentary：

The judgment of Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court on the copyright case of product packaging design emphasizes the core position of originality in copyright protection. The court clearly pointed out that only the limited personalized arrangement and combination of the product name, efficacy description and other contents is not enough to constitute the originality in the sense of copyright law, so it is not protected. The ruling conveys strict standards for copyright protection, requiring works to have a certain creative height, rather than a simple patchwork of elements. For creators, this case reminds them that in pursuing copyright protection, they must ensure unique creativity and originality in order to gain legal recognition.

《意见》明确了“四个坚持”的基本原则，即服务大局、聚焦重点、服务全链条、普惠服务与重点服务并重，并设定了提升利企便民水平和支撑重大科技创新的目标。特别强调要“在持续强化利企便民的普惠性服务基础上，更大力度加强对科技创新和发展现代化产业体系的公共服务支撑。”

此外，《意见》在公共服务支撑高质量创造、高效益运用、高标准保护以及促进公共服务提质增效等4个方面，提出共计13条针对性的具体举措，包括：强化对科技创新的攻关服务，支持关键核心技术攻关和产业创新发展；聚焦专利转化，协同推进知识产权的产业化，促进高校和科研机构存量专利的转化运用；完善共治管理，支撑知识产权的高标准保护，包括加强知识产权保护示范区建设，优化公共服务供给；加强分类指导，提高公共服务机构的运行效率，形成职责清晰、优势互补的工作格局；以及强化公共服务人才队伍建设，提升服务的精准性和有效性。

文德短评：

国知局发布的《关于全面提升知识产权公共服务效能的指导意见》表明，中国在知识产权领域的公共服务正在迈向更加精细化和高效化。《意见》通过明确“四个坚持”原则，强调服务全链条、平衡普惠与重点服务的双重目标，体现了对科技创新和产业发展的强力支持。特别是提出的13条具体举措，如强化关键技术攻关、推动专利转化、优化服务供给等，不仅为科技创新提供了坚实的保障，也为知识产权的全方位保护奠定了基础。

The State Bureau of China issued the Guiding Opinions on Comprehensively Improving the Efficiency of Intellectual Property Public Service

The Opinions clarified the basic principles of "four principles", namely, serving the overall situation, focusing on key points, serving the whole chain, paying equal attention to inclusive services and key services, and set the goal of improving the benefit of enterprises and the people and supporting major scientific and technological innovation. In particular, " on the basis of continuously strengthening inclusive services for enterprises and the people, we should make greater efforts to strengthen public service support for scientific and technological innovation and the development of a modern industrial system.”

Furthermore, in the four aspects of supporting high quality creation, high efficiency application, high standard protection and promoting the quality and efficiency of public services, Put forward a total of 13 specific specific specific measures, Including: strengthening the key breakthrough services for scientific and technological innovation, Supporting key and core technologies and industrial innovation and development; Focus on patent transformation, Jointly promote the industrialization of intellectual property rights, Promote the transformation and application of existing patents in universities and scientific research institutions; Improve the co-governance and management, Underpin the high standards of intellectual property protection, Including strengthening the construction of demonstration zones for intellectual property rights protection, Optimize the supply of public services; Strengthen classified guidance, Improve the operation efficiency of public service agencies, Forming a working pattern with clear responsibilities and complementary advantages; And to strengthen the construction of the public service personnel team, Improve the accuracy and effectiveness of services.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Guidance on Comprehensively Improving the Efficiency of Intellectual Property Public Services issued by the State Information Bureau of China shows that China's public services in the field of intellectual property are becoming more refined and efficient. By clarifying the principle of "four principles", the Opinions emphasize the dual goals of serving the whole chain, balancing universal benefits and key services, reflecting the strong support for scientific and technological innovation and industrial development. In particular, the 13 specific measures proposed, such as strengthening key technologies, promoting patent transformation, and optimizing service supply, not only provide a solid guarantee for scientific and technological innovation, but also lay a foundation for the all-round protection of intellectual property rights.

《财政部 国家发展改革委关于调整优化专利收费政策的通知》（财税〔2024〕23号）、《国家发展改革委 财政部关于专利权补偿期年费标准等有关事项的通知》（发改价格〔2024〕1156号），国家知识产权局调整部分专利收费标准和减缴政策：

一、专利权人提出专利权期限补偿请求，应缴纳专利权期限补偿请求费，收费标准为每件200元。专利权期限补偿请求经审查符合期限补偿条件的，应缴纳专利权补偿期年费，收费标准为每件每年8000元，不足一年部分不收取。

二、对专利开放许可实施期间的专利年费减免15%。同时适用其他专利收费减免政策的，可以选择适用最优惠的政策，但不得重复享受。

三、通过《工业品外观设计国际注册海牙协定》进入我国的外观设计国际申请，缴纳的第一期和第二期单独指定费，可按照《财政部 国家发展改革委关于印发〈专利收费减缴办法〉的通知》（财税〔2016〕78号）、《财政部 国家发展改革委关于停征免征和调整部分行政事业性收费有关政策的通知》（财税〔2018〕37号）、《财政部 国家发展改革委关于减免部分行政事业性收费有关政策的通知》（财税〔2019〕45号）有关规定进行减缴。

四、通过批量著录项目变更请求进行申请人（或专利权人）姓名或名称变更，且不涉及权利转移的，按一件变更缴纳著录事项变更费。

五、将《国家发展改革委 财政部关于重新核发国家知识产权局行政事业性收费标准等有关问题的通知》（发改价格〔2017〕270号）附件2的注释部分修订为“由中国国家知识产权局作为受理局受理并进行国际检索的国际专利申请（PCT申请），在进入中国国家阶段时免缴申请费及申请附加费。由中国国家知识产权局作出国际检索报告或专利性国际初步报告的PCT申请，在进入中国国家阶段并提出实质审查请求时，免缴实质审查费。PCT申请进入中国国家阶段的其他收费标准依照国内部分执行。”

六、中国国家知识产权局代世界知识产权组织等机构以及其他国家和地区收取的费用，其收费标准和减缴规定按照中国国家知识产权局与上述机构、国家和地区的约定或者有关国际合约执行。

文德短评：

国家知识产权局调整部分专利收费标准和实施减缴政策，旨在降低创新成本，增强专利保护意识，优化资源配置，支持小微企业及国际专利申请，同时明确收费标准并加强监管，以全面推动社会创新能力的提升和国际知识产权合作，营造更加公平、高效的创新环境。

The Chinese National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has adjusted certain patent fee standards and reduction policies.

The CNIPA has adjusted some patent fee standards and reduction policies as per the “Notice on Adjusting and Optimizing Patent Fee Policies” (Cai Shui [2024] No. 23) and the “Notice on Matters Concerning Patent Term Compensation Fee Standards” (Fa Gai Jia Ge [2024] No. 1156) from the Ministry of Finance and the National Development and Reform Commission:

1. Patent holders who request a patent term compensation must pay a compensation request fee of 200 yuan per item. If the request is approved, a compensation period annual fee of 8,000 yuan per year per item is applicable; fees are not charged for incomplete years.

2. Patent annuity fees are reduced by 15% during the period of open patent licensing. If other patent fee reduction policies also apply, the most favorable policy can be chosen, but benefits cannot be combined.

3. For international design applications entering China through the Hague Agreement on the International Registration of Industrial Designs, the first and second individual designation fees can be reduced according to the relevant regulations in the “Notice on Issuing the Patent Fee Reduction Measures” (Cai Shui [2016] No. 78), the “Notice on Policies Regarding the Suspension, Exemption, and Adjustment of Certain Administrative Fees” (Cai Shui [2018] No. 37), and the “Notice on Policies Regarding the Reduction and Exemption of Certain Administrative Fees” (Cai Shui [2019] No. 45).

4. If a bulk request is made for changes in bibliographic items (such as the name of the applicant or patent holder) without involving a transfer of rights, only a single change fee needs to be paid.

5. The footnote in Annex 2 of the “Notice on the Reissuance of Administrative Fee Standards by the State Intellectual Property Office” (Fa Gai Jia Ge [2017] No. 270) has been revised. The footnote now states that international patent applications (PCT applications) filed through the State Intellectual Property Office as the receiving office, and entering the national phase in China, are exempt from the application fee and additional application fee. PCT applications for which the State Intellectual Property Office conducts an international search report or preliminary patentability report are exempt from the substantive examination fee when entering the national phase and requesting a substantive examination. Other fees related to PCT applications entering the national phase will follow domestic fee standards.

6. Fees collected by the State Intellectual Property Office on behalf of the World Intellectual Property Organization and other countries and regions will be charged according to the agreements between the State Intellectual Property Office and these organizations, countries, and regions, or as per relevant international treaties.

ZLWD Commentary：

The adjustments to some patent fee standards and the implementation of reduction policies by the State Intellectual Property Office aim to lower innovation costs, enhance patent protection awareness, optimize resource allocation, support small and micro enterprises, and encourage international patent applications. These measures are intended to promote social innovation and international intellectual property cooperation, creating a more equitable and efficient innovation environment.

近年来，以电动汽车、锂电池、光伏产品为代表的中国制造“新三样”出口大幅增长，带动我国外贸规模稳步提升，结构持续优化。为服务我国外贸创新发展需要，加强“新三样”相关技术专利与经济活动的关联分析，助力培育国际 合作和竞争新优势，国家知识产权局办公室编制《“新三样”相关技术专利分类体系（2024）》。

该分类体系将“新三样”相关技术划分为四级技术分支，包括电动汽车、锂电池、光伏等3个一级技术分支。其中，电动汽车包括电动汽车整车制造，电动汽车装置、配件制造，电动汽车相关设施制造，电动汽车相关服务等4个二级技术分支，下设8个三级技术分支和4个四级技术分支；锂电池包括正极材料、负极 材料、电解质、隔膜、锂电池模组及电池包（PACK）等5个二级 技术分支，下设17个三级技术分支和6个四级技术分支；光伏包括多晶硅、单晶硅、电池片、光伏组件等4个二级技术分支，下设16个三级技术分支。将“新三样”相关技术各技术分支建立与国际专利分类的参照关系，经合并去重，共建立关系687条，涉及国际专利分类表5个部、15个大类、28 个小类、91个大组、1992个小组。

文德短评：

《“新三样”相关技术专利分类体系（2024）》的发布，对于促进我国电动汽车、锂电池、光伏等外贸新兴领域的专利统计监测与国际比较分析，支持外贸创新发展，推动现代化产业体系建设，以及提升知识产权保护和运用能力等方面都具有深远意义，有助于我国在全球科技竞争中占据更有利的位置。

The CNIPA Issues the “2024 Classification System for Patents Related to the ‘New Three’ Technologies”

In recent years, exports of China's "New Three" products—electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaic products—have grown significantly, driving a steady increase in China's foreign trade scale and continued optimization of trade structure. To serve the innovative development of China’s foreign trade, strengthen the correlation analysis between patents related to the "New Three" technologies and economic activities, and foster new advantages in international cooperation and competition, the State Intellectual Property Office has compiled the “2024 Classification System for Patents Related to the ‘New Three’ Technologies.”

This classification system divides the "New Three" related technologies into four levels, including three first-level categories: electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaics. Electric vehicles include four second-level categories such as complete vehicle manufacturing, device and accessory manufacturing, related facility manufacturing, and related services, with eight third-level and four fourth-level subcategories. Lithium batteries include five second-level categories such as cathode materials, anode materials, electrolytes, separators, and battery modules (PACK), with 17 third-level and six fourth-level subcategories. Photovoltaics include four second-level categories such as polycrystalline silicon, monocrystalline silicon, solar cells, and photovoltaic modules, with 16 third-level subcategories. A total of 687 relationships were established between these technology branches and the International Patent Classification, involving five sections, 15 main classes, 28 subclasses, 91 main groups, and 1,992 subgroups of the International Patent Classification.

ZLWD Commentary：

The release of the “2024 Classification System for Patents Related to the ‘New Three’ Technologies” holds significant importance for promoting the patent statistics monitoring and international comparative analysis of emerging fields in China's foreign trade, supporting the innovative development of foreign trade, advancing the construction of a modern industrial system, and enhancing the protection and utilization of intellectual property. This will help China gain a more advantageous position in global technological competition.

修改后的《中华人民共和国专利法实施细则》新增优先权恢复、优先权要求的增加或者改正制度，配套修改的《专利审查指南》对上述制度也作出了进一步细化规定，相关规定已于2024 年1 月20日起实施。新制度给予了申请人更多有关优先权期限和手续处理方面的有效救济，并与《专利合作条约》国际申请相关规则进行衔接。国家知识产权局发布《关于优先权恢复、优先权要求的增加或者改正的指引》，旨在通过介绍制度背景、适用条件、办理流程、典型案例等具体内容，引导创新主体准确理解和使用优先权恢复、优先权要求的增加或者改正制度，帮助申请人提升专利申请相关手续的办理质量，推动专利事业高质量发展。

文德短评：

《关于优先权恢复、优先权要求的增加或者改正的指引》的发布，不仅完善了知识产权法律政策体系，提升了专利申请相关手续的办理质量，还促进了与国际规则的衔接，为创新主体提供了更加清晰、具体的法律指导，推动了我国专利事业的高质量发展。

The CNIPA Issues the “Guidelines on Priority Right Restoration, Priority Right Addition, or Correction”

The revised “Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China” introduced a system for priority right restoration and priority right addition or correction. The revised “Patent Examination Guidelines” have further detailed these systems, with the relevant provisions coming into effect on January 20, 2024. The new system provides applicants with more effective remedies regarding priority right deadlines and procedural handling and aligns with the rules related to international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). 

The State Intellectual Property Office issued the “Guidelines on Priority Right Restoration, Priority Right Addition, or Correction” to introduce the background, applicable conditions, processing procedures, typical cases, and other specific content of the system. This is intended to guide innovators to accurately understand and use the system, improve the quality of patent application procedures, and promote high-quality development in the patent field.

ZLWD Commentary：

The issuance of the “Guidelines on Priority Right Restoration, Priority Right Addition, or Correction” not only improves the intellectual property legal and policy framework, enhances the quality of patent application procedures, and promotes alignment with international rules, but also provides more clear and specific legal guidance for innovators, fostering high-quality development in China’s patent field.

自8月1日起，深圳市应由基层人民法院受理的第一审涉外涉港澳台知识产权民事、行政（含行政非诉审查）、刑事案件，统一由福田区人民法院受理。与此同时，全市其他基层人民法院不再受理上述案件。在今年8月1日前，全市其他基层人民法院已经立案但尚未审结的上述案件，仍由原受理法院继续审理；当事人已提交起诉材料或申请材料但尚未立案的，由原受理法院立案审理。

文德短评：

深圳一审涉外涉港澳台知识产权案件集中由福田法院统一受理，旨在加强跨境知识产权审判的专业化、高效化，提升司法公信力，为科技创新和产业发展提供坚实司法保障，同时优化司法资源配置，推动粤港澳大湾区法治协同，共同打造国际一流的法治化营商环境。

Shenzhen to Centralize Jurisdiction of First-instance Foreign-related, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan IP Cases to Futian Court Starting This Month

From August 1, 2024, first-instance civil, administrative (including non-litigation administrative review), and criminal cases related to intellectual property that involve foreign parties, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan and should be handled by basic-level people's courts in Shenzhen will be uniformly accepted by the Futian District People's Court. At the same time, other basic-level people's courts in the city will no longer accept such cases. Cases filed before August 1, 2024, by other basic-level courts that have not yet been concluded will continue to be handled by the original court. If a party has submitted litigation or application materials but has not yet filed a case, the original court will still accept and handle it.

ZLWD Commentary：

The centralization of first-instance foreign-related, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan intellectual property cases in Shenzhen to the Futian Court aims to strengthen the specialization and efficiency of cross-border IP trials, enhance judicial credibility, provide solid judicial protection for technological innovation and industrial development, optimize judicial resource allocation, and promote legal cooperation in the Greater Bay Area. This is part of the effort to create a world-class legal business environment.