中伦文德国际知识产权观察 - 2024年7月刊 International IP/IT Review July 2024

为贯彻落实《国务院关于加快推进政务服务标准化规范化便利化的指导意见》（国发〔2022〕5号）、《国务院关于进一步优化政务服务提升行政效能推动“高效办成一件事”的指导意见》（国发〔2024〕3号）的工作部署，便利社会公众获取知识产权业务办理信息，推动政务服务无差别受理、同标准办理，根据新修订的《专利法实施细则》《专利审查指南》，国家知识产权局修订编制了《知识产权政务服务事项办事指南（第二版）》。该指引包括专利、商标、地理标志、集成电路布图设计、知识产权五大部分，涵盖相关政务服务的各个方面。2023年3月3日公布的《知识产权政务服务事项办事指南》同时废止。

文德短评:

该指引立足于知识产权政务服务，内容覆盖专利、商标等各方面，对优化相关政务服务流程，提升服务质量具有重要意义。

The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has released the Guidelines for Handling Government Service Matters of Intellectual Property (Second Edition)

To implement the work deployment of the Guiding Opinions of the State Council on Accelerating the Standardization, Normalization, and Convenience of Government Services (GF [2022] No. 5) and the Guiding Opinions of the State Council on Further Optimizing Government Services, Enhancing Administrative Efficiency, and Promoting the "Efficient Handling of One Matter" (GF [2024] No. 3), facilitate the public to obtain information on intellectual property business handling, and promote the non-discriminatory acceptance and standardized handling of government services, the China National Intellectual Property Administration has revised and compiled the Guidelines for Handling Government Service Matters of Intellectual Property (Second Edition) in accordance with the newly revised Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law and the Patent Examination Guidelines.

The guidelines cover five major parts of patents, trademarks, geographical indications, integrated circuit layout designs, and intellectual property rights, encompassing all aspects of related government services. The previous edition of the Guidelines for Handling Government Service Matters of Intellectual Property published on March 3, 2023, was simultaneously repealed.

ZLWD Commentary：

Based on the needs of intellectual property government services and covering various aspects such as patents and trademarks, these guidelines are of great significance for optimizing related government service processes and improving service quality.

2024年5月31日，国家知识产权局办公室印发《国家知识产权信息公共服务网点备案实施办法（修订）》，实施办法明确了备案网点的定义、作用、申请备案国家知识产权信息公共服务网点的服务机构应当具备的条件和程序。办法还对网点建设、保障和管理提出了具体的要求，要求网点应加强日常管理和服务能力建设，保障资源和资金支持，加强人员培训，充分 运用现代技术手段和新媒体，提升服务质量和效率，探索开展个 性化、差异化、数字化服务。鼓励各网点间，以及网点和其他知识产权公共服务机构间，加强交流协作和资源分享，跨领域、跨区域开展协同 服务、业务交流、课题研究等。

文德短评:

实施办法旨在完善知识产权信息服务体系，统筹布局全国知识产权信息公共服务网点建设，不仅规范了知识产权信息公共服务网点的建设与管理，还促进了知识产权信息的有效传播与利用，为提升国家整体创新能力和产业发展提供了有力支持。

The National Intellectual Property Administration issued the "Implementation Measures for the Registration of National Intellectual Property Information Public Service Outlets (Revision)."

On May 31, 2024, the Office of the National Intellectual Property Administration issued the "Implementation Measures for the Registration of National Intellectual Property Information Public Service Outlets (Revision)." 

The implementation measures clarify the definition, role, and conditions and procedures for applying for the registration of national intellectual property information public service outlets. The measures also put forward specific requirements for the construction, support, and management of outlets, requiring outlets to strengthen daily management and service capacity building, ensure resource and financial support, strengthen personnel training, fully utilize modern technological means and new media, enhance service quality and efficiency, and explore personalized, differentiated, and digitalized services. It is encouraged to strengthen communication, collaboration, and resource sharing between different outlets, as well as between outlets and other intellectual property public service institutions, to carry out collaborative services, business exchanges, research projects, etc. across fields and regions.

ZLWD Commentary：

The National Intellectual Property Administration is promoting high-quality development of the intellectual property service industry by increasing training efforts and enhancing the patent and trademark agency supervision capabilities across the country.

为加快知识产权强国建设，国家知识产权局、中央宣传部 、最高人民法院、最高人民检察院等部门印发《知识产权保护体系建设工程实施方案》。该方案以习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想为指导，明确到 2027 年，知识产权保护体系和保护能力现代化建设迈出实质性步伐，知识产权法律法规更加全面系统，严保护的政策和标准更加健全，行政执法和司法保护更加严格，授权确权更加优质高效，快速协同保护更加顺畅，知识产权领域国家安全治理基础进一步巩固，社会共治合力进一步增强，保护能力显著提升。覆盖国家、省、市、县四级的知识产权保护网络更加完善，知识产权保护基础进一步夯实，大保护工作格局全面形成。到 2035 年，知识产权保护体系和保护能力现代化基本实现，形成政府履职尽责、执法部门严格监管、司法机关公正司法、经营主体规范管理、行业组织自律自治、社会公众诚信守法的现代化知识产权保护治理体系。

文德短评：

《知识产权保护体系建设工程实施方案》的发布标志着我国在加强知识产权保护、推动创新发展和构建现代化治理体系方面迈出了坚实步伐。该方案为构建更加全面系统、高效协同的知识产权保护体系提供了明确指引，旨在通过加强审查授权、行政执法、司法保护等环节，实现知识产权的严格、协同、精准、高效和智慧保护，为加快知识产权强国建设、促进经济高质量发展提供有力支撑。

The National Intellectual Property Administration, the Central Propaganda Department, the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and other departments have issued the "Implementation Plan for the Construction of the Intellectual Property Protection System Engineering."

To accelerate the construction of a strong country in intellectual property, the National Intellectual Property Administration, the Central Propaganda Department, the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and other departments have issued the "Implementation Plan for the Construction of the Intellectual Property Protection System Engineering." Guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, the plan clarifies that by 2027, substantial progress will be made in modernizing the intellectual property protection system and protection capabilities. 

The intellectual property laws and regulations will become more comprehensive and systematic, the policies and standards for strict protection will be further improved, administrative enforcement and judicial protection will be stricter, authorization and confirmation will be more high-quality and efficient, rapid collaborative protection will be smoother, the foundation for national security governance in the field of intellectual property will be further consolidated, the joint forces for social governance will be further enhanced, and the protection capabilities will be significantly improved. A more perfect intellectual property protection network covering national, provincial, city, and county levels will be established, further consolidating the foundation for intellectual property protection, and a comprehensive protection framework will be fully formed. 

By 2035, the modernization of the intellectual property protection system and protection capabilities will be basically achieved, forming a modern intellectual property protection governance system with the government fulfilling its duties, law enforcement departments conducting strict supervision, judicial organs administering justice fairly, business entities managing in a standardized manner, industry organizations practicing self-regulation and autonomy, and the public observing integrity and lawfulness.

ZLWD Commentary：

The release of the Implementation Plan for the Construction of Intellectual Property Protection System signifies a solid step forward for China in strengthening intellectual property protection, promoting innovation development, and building a modern governance system. This plan provides clear guidance for building a more comprehensive, systematic, and highly coordinated intellectual property protection system, aiming to achieve strict, coordinated, precise, efficient, and intelligent protection of intellectual property rights through strengthened examination and authorization, administrative law enforcement, judicial protection, and other aspects, providing strong support for accelerating the construction of a strong intellectual property country and promoting high-quality economic development.

公平竞争审查条例》（下称《条例》）共5章27条，由总则、审查标准、审查机制、监督保障和附则五部分组成，自2024年8月1日起施行。

在总则部分，《条例》明确了公平竞争审查的范围，即行政机关等单位在起草涉及经营者经济活动的法律、行政法规、地方性法规、规章、规范性文件以及具体政策措施时的行为。同时，根据《条例》，有权开展公平竞争审查工作的主体是行政机关和法律、法规授权的具有管理公共事务职能的组织。

在审查标准部分，《条例》列举了四类影响公平竞争的行为及其具体表现形式，包括：1. 起草单位起草的政策措施，含有限制或者变相限制市场准入和退出的内容；2. 含有限制商品、要素自由流动的内容；3. 没有法律、行政法规依据或者未经国务院批准，含有影响生产经营成本的内容；4. 含有影响生产经营行为的内容。

《条例》在本部分还规定了公平竞争审查的三种例外情形，包括为维护国家安全和发展利益；为促进科学技术进步、为增强国家自主创新能力和为实现节约能源、保护环境、救灾救助等社会公共利益的情形。但这些例外只在没有对公平竞争影响更小的替代方案，并能够确定合理的实施期限或者终止条件的前提条件下方可适用。

在审查机制方面，《条例》规定拟由县级以上人民政府出台或者提请本级人民代表大会及其常务委员会审议的政策措施，由本级人民政府市场监督管理部门会同起草单位在起草阶段开展公平竞争审查。政策措施未经公平竞争审查，或者不符合《条例》规定的，不得出台。

在监督保障方面，《条例》规定市场监督管理部门应建立健全公平竞争审查抽查机制，组织对有关政策措施开展抽查，违反《条例》规定的，应当督促起草单位进行整改。同时，对违反《条例》规定的政策措施，任何单位和个人可以向市场监督管理部门举报。市场监督管理部门接到举报后，应当及时处理或者转送有关部门处理。

文德短评 ：

《公平竞争审查条例》的出台是我国市场经济法治化的重要进展。条例明确了行政机关和相关组织在制定政策时必须进行公平竞争审查，以防止不当干预市场行为。四类具体行为的列举及三种例外情形的设定，既细化了审查标准，又在国家安全等特殊情况下提供了灵活性。条例强调政策措施必须经过审查方可出台，并通过抽查和举报机制强化监督，确保条例落实到位。

The State Council promulgated the Regulations on Fair Competition  Reviews

The Regulations on Fair Competition Reviews (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations) consists of five chapters and 27 articles, consisting of five parts: general provisions, review standards, review mechanism, supervision and guarantee, and supplementary provisions. The Regulations will come into force on August 1, 2024.

In the general provisions, the Regulations specify the scope of fair competition review, that is, the behavior of administrative organs and other units in drafting laws, administrative regulations, local regulations, rules, normative documents and specific policies and measures related to the economic activities of business operators. At the same time, according to the Regulations, the main body with the right to carry out the fair competition review work is the administrative organs and the organizations authorized by laws and regulations to have the function of managing public affairs.

In the review criteria, the Regulations list four types of behaviors that affect fair competition and their specific forms, including: 1. The policies and measures drafted by the drafting body restrictingmarket access and exit in a direct or disguised form; 2. The contents restricting the free flow of commodities and factors; 3. The contents affecting the production and operation costs without the approval of the State Council nor the basis of law or regulations; 4. The contents that affect the production and operation behaviors.

In this part, the Regulations also stipulate three exceptions for fair competition review, including the  protection of national security and development interests; the promotion of scientific and technological progressand the enhancement of national independent innovation capacity; and the realization of social and public interests such as energy conservation, environmental protection and disaster relief and assistance. However, these exceptions  only apply if there is no alternative with less impact on fair competition and a reasonable implementation period or termination conditions can be determined.

In terms of the  reviewing mechanism, the Regulations stipulate that the policies and measures to be issued by the people's government at or above the county level or submitted to the people's congress and its standing committee at the corresponding level for deliberation, shall be examined by the fair competition administration department of the people's government at the corresponding level together with the drafting unit at the drafting stage. Policies and measuresthat have not been examined for fair competition, or that do not conform to the provisions of the Regulations, shall not be issued.

In terms of supervision and guarantee, the Regulations stipulate that the market supervision and administration department shall establish  advanced mechanism of fair competition examination and spot check, organize spot checks on relevant policies and measures.  For those violate the provisions of the Regulations,  the market supervision and administration department shall urge the drafting units to make rectification. At the same time, any unit and individual may report the policies and measures that violate the Regulations to the market supervision and administration department. Upon receiving the report, the market supervision and administration department shall deal with it in time or transfer it to the relevant department for handling.

ZLWD Commentary：

CNIPA released the second edition of the work guide (hereinafter referred to as the  New Guide).  On the basis of the first edition of the work guide, newly revised contents are added  based on  the newly revised Implementation Details of the Patent Lawand the Patent Review Guide. The New Guide also further optimizes the intellectual property government service process, improves service efficiency, and ensures the transparency and convenience of intellectual property protection work. Specifically, the new guide in the patent part added "patent term compensation" and "drug patent period compensation", mainly for new drug  patents that have obtained marketing authorizations in China, the patent holder can request the patent administrative department under the State Council for the patent term compensation for the time taken for the new drug market review approvalwithin three months upon the obtaining of the new drug marketing authorizations.

国知局此次发布的第二版《办事指南》（下称新版指南）在第一版《办事指南》的基础上，根据新修订的《专利法实施细则》和《专利审查指南》新增修改内容，并进一步优化了知识产权政务服务流程，着重提升服务效率，确保知识产权保护工作的透明性和便捷性。具体而言，新版指南在专利部分新增了“专利权期限补偿”与“药品专利权期限补偿”的内容，主要针对在中国获得上市许可的新药相关发明专利，专利权人可以在新药获得上市许可三个月内请求国务院专利行政部门对新药上市审评审批占用的时间给予专利权期限补偿。

文德短评：

新版《办事指南》的发布彰显了国知局在优化知识产权政务服务和提升服务效率方面的努力。新增的“专利权期限补偿”和“药品专利权期限补偿”内容，尤其是针对新药上市许可的规定，体现了对创新药物研发企业权益的重视。这一改进不仅增强了专利保护的力度，也提高了专利权人获得补偿的透明性和便捷性。

CNIPA revised and issued the Guidelines for Handling Intellectual Property Government Services (Second Edition)

CNIPA released the second edition of the work guide (hereinafter referred to as the  New Guide).  On the basis of the first edition of the work guide, newly revised contents are added  based on  the newly revised Implementation Details of the Patent Lawand the Patent Review Guide. The New Guide also further optimizes the intellectual property government service process, improves service efficiency, and ensures the transparency and convenience of intellectual property protection work. Specifically, the new guide in the patent part added "patent term compensation" and "drug patent period compensation", mainly for new drug  patents that have obtained marketing authorizations in China, the patent holder can request the patent administrative department under the State Council for the patent term compensation for the time taken for the new drug market review approvalwithin three months upon the obtaining of the new drug marketing authorizations.

The release of the New Guide highlights the Administration’s efforts in optimizing intellectual property government services and improving service efficiency. The new contents of "patent term compensation" and "drug patent term compensation", especially the provisions on the marketing  authorization of new drugs, reflect the  emphasis of the rights and interests of innovative drug research and development enterprises. This improvement not only enhances the strength of patent protection, but also improves the transparency and convenience of the  patent holders in receiving compensation.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Supreme People's Court Intellectual Property Court's refusal to support the software company's "phishing" rights defence demonstrated the importance it attaches to business integrity and legitimate rights defence. The company's use of free software to induce users to violate the terms of copyright labelling and then filing a large number of infringement lawsuits was found to be a dishonest business operation. The judgement of the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme Court reasonably lowered the amount of compensation and guided the company to take proper ways to defend its rights. This ruling not only protects the legitimate rights and interests of users, but also sends a clear judicial signal, further safeguarding market order and judicial justice.

与此前2020年的版本相比，修订版的《国家知识产权信息公共服务网点备案办法》基于《 “十四五”国家知识产权保护和运用规划》和《知识产权公共服务“十四五”规划》，对此前的版本进行了细化。

首先，修订版在定义与资格的认定上更加明确。比如，在第二条中对国家知识产权信息公共服务网点的定义进行了扩展，明确了它们是全国及地方知识产权公共服务体系的重要组成部分。同时，修订版在第五条中对申请备案的服务机构应具备的条件进行了更详细的规定，包括团队人员的专业能力、工作制度、基础设施等。

在备案程序上，修订版也有了更加详尽的规定。比如，在第九条中明确了备案有效期为三年，并对重要信息变更的报备流程进行了规定，在第十二条中扩展了国家知识产权信息公共服务网点应提供的服务内容，包括知识产权咨询服务、信息查询检索服务、宣传培训服务等。

同时，修订版也对于网点的服务和保障有了系统的规定，在第十三条中增加了特色服务的内容，如重点产业知识产权信息分析服务、中小微企业知识产权服务、知识产权数据库及工具平台开发等。在第十四条、第十五条和第十六条中对网点的管理和保障措施进行了更详细的规定，包括业务规范制定、能力提升培训、交流平台搭建等。

最后，修订版明确了违反备案规定的处理措施与后果。在修订版第十八条中对提供虚假材料或违规活动的服务机构的处理措施进行了明确，包括终止或撤销备案，并规定了三年内不得再申请备案的限制。

文德短评:

修订版《国家知识产权信息公共服务网点备案实施办法》通过细化定义、资格认定、备案程序和服务内容，显著提升了知识产权公共服务的规范性和专业性。明确网点定义和资格条件，确保服务机构具备专业能力和完善设施，增强了服务质量和公信力。详尽的备案程序和服务内容规定，有助于规范网点运作，提升服务效率和透明度。此外，特色服务内容的增加，体现了对重点产业和中小微企业的重视，为知识产权信息分析和服务平台开发提供了有力支持。对违规行为的明确处理措施，强化了管理和保障，确保制度的严肃性和执行力。

CNIPA revised the Implementation Measures for the Filing of National Intellectual Property Information Public Service Branches

Compared with the previous 2020 version, the revised version of the Implementation Measures for the Filing of National Intellectual Property Information Public Service Branches has detailed the previous version based on the 14th Five-Year Plan for National Intellectual Property Protection and Application and the 14th Five-Year Plan for Intellectual Property Public Service.

First of all, the revised version is more clear in the definition and qualification identification. For example, in Article 2, the definition of national intellectual property information public service outlets is expanded,   makes it clear that they are  important parts of the national and local intellectual property public service system. At the same time, the revised version of the article 5 provides more detailed provisions on the conditions that the service institutions should meet for filing, including the professional ability of the team members, working system, infrastructure, etc.

In the filing procedure, the revised version also has more detailed provisions. For example, in Article 9, it is clear that the validity period of the  filing is three years, and the reporting process for the change of important information is stipulated. In Article 12, the service content that the national intellectual property information public service outlets should be expanded, including intellectual property consulting services, information inquiry and retrieval services, publicity and training services, etc.

At the same time, the revised version also has systematic provisions on the service and guarantee provided by  the network. In Article 13, the content of  special services has been added, such as intellectual property information analysis services for key industries, intellectual property services for small, medium and micro enterprises, intellectual property database and tool platform development, etc. In Articles 14,15 and 16, more detailed provisions are made on the management and safeguard measures of outlets, including the formulation of business norms, ability improvement training, and the construction of communication platform, etc.

Finally, the revised version clarifies the handling measures and consequences of the violation of the filing provisions. In article 18 of the revised version, the handling measures of the service agencies that provide false materials or illegal activities are clarified, including the termination or cancellation of filing, and the restriction of not applying for filing within three years is stipulated.

ZLWD Commentary：

The revised version of the Implementation Measures for the Filing of National Intellectual Property Information Public Service outlets has significantly improved the standardization and professionalism of intellectual property public services through detailed definitions, qualification identification, filing procedures and service contents. The definition of  networks and qualifications have been clarified to ensure that service institutions have professional capabilities and  advanced facilities, and enhance the quality of services and government credibility. Detailed filing procedures and service content provisions will help to standardize the operation of  networks and improve service efficiency and transparency. In addition, the increase of  special service content reflects the  emphasis of key industriesand small, medium and micro enterprises, and provides strong support for the development of intellectual property information analysis and service platform development. Clear measures to deal with violations have strengthened the management and guarantee to ensure the seriousness and implementation ability of the system.

该报告指出，2023年，市场监管部门反垄断执法成效显著。共查处垄断协议案件16件，滥用市场支配地位案件11件，经营者集中反垄断案件797件，滥用行政权力排除、限制竞争案件39件。审结经营者集中案件797件，其中无条件批准782件，附加限制性条件批准4件，涉及多个行业和领域。同时，法规体系也在逐渐完善，2023年，《国务院关于经营者集中申报标准的规定》完成修订；《制止滥用行政权力排除、限制竞争行为》等5部反垄断配套规章同时进行更新；国务院反垄断反不正当竞争委员会还制定出台了《关于行业协会的反垄断指南》，细化对违法行为的认定标准，加强行业协会反垄断合规建设。

文德短评：

《中国反垄断执法年度报告（2023）》彰显了国家市场监管总局在打击垄断行为方面取得的显著成效，表明我国在强化市场监管和反垄断执法方面的决心。查处多起垄断协议和滥用市场支配地位案件，反映出执法力度的加大。完善法规体系，修订和出台多部配套规章，以及行业协会的反垄断指南，进一步细化了对违法行为的认定标准。这些举措不仅增强了市场公平竞争环境，也为企业合规经营提供了明确指引，有助于构建健康有序的市场生态。

The State Administration of Market Regulation(National Anti-Monopoly  Bureau) issued the Annual Report on China's Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement (2023)

The report pointed out that in 2023, market regulators have achieved remarkable results in anti-monopoly law enforcement. A total of 16 cases of monopoly agreements, 11 cases of abuse of dominant market position, 797 cases of anti-monopoly cases with concentration of business operators, and 39 cases of abuse of administrative power to exclude and restrict competition.797 cases of concentration of business operators were concluded, of which 782 were approved unconditionally, and 4 were approved with additional restrictive conditions, involving multiple industries and fields. At the same time, the regulatory system is also gradually improving. In 2023, the revision of the Provisions of the State Council on Centralized Declaration Standards is completed; the five supporting regulations such as  Deter the Abuse of Administrative Powerto Eliminate and Limit Competition are updated simultaneously, and the Anti-monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee of the State Council also formulated the Anti-monopoly Guidelines on Industry Association to refine the identification standards for illegal acts and strengthen the anti-monopoly compliance construction of industry associations.

ZLWD Commentary：

China's Annual Report on Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement (2023) highlights the remarkable achievements achieved by the State Administration for Market Regulation in cracking down on monopoly behavior, and shows China's determination to strengthen market supervision and anti-monopoly law enforcement. The investigation and punishment of  multiple cases of monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position reflects the strengthening of law enforcement. The regulatory system is improved, a number of supporting regulations, as well as the anti-monopoly guidelines of industry associations are revised and issued,  which further refined the identification standards of illegal acts. These measures not only, improve the fair competition market environment, but also provide clear guidance for enterprises on  business complianceand help to build a healthy and orderly market ecology.

《最高人民法院关于审理垄断民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》（下称“《司法解释》”）共六部分51条。第一部分涵盖程序事项，包括垄断民事纠纷案件的界定、起诉方式、案件管辖、合并审理、证据认定、公益诉讼、中止诉讼等。第二部分对相关市场界定作出规定，包括界定相关市场的原则要求、证明责任、分析方法、考量因素等事项；第三部分对横向垄断协议中的协同行为、行为主体、药品专利反向支付协议、算法协议、跨平台最惠待遇，以及纵向垄断协议的举证责任、反竞争效果认定及其例外，组织帮助行为、垄断协议豁免等事项作出规定；第四部分明确了包括市场支配地位的界定、各种类型滥用市场支配地位行为的分析认定等事项；第五部分则规定了垄断民事纠纷案件的民事责任形式、损失认定、行为效力、诉讼时效等事项。

值得注意的是，针对发现和查处存在较大困难的横向垄断协议，《司法解释》在第十八条专门规定了“其他协同行为”的四项考量因素及其举证责任分配规则。具体而言，《司法解释》提出了四项考量因素中“1+2+4”或者“1+3+4”两种判断方法和证明规则。“1+2+4”证明规则是指只要原告证明经营者存在市场行为一致性和经营者之间存在意思联络、信息交流或者传递，此时若经营者不能对其行为一致性作出合理解释，人民法院即可认定“其他协同行为”形式的横向垄断协议成立。而“1+3+4”证明规则是指只要原告证明经营者存在市场行为一致性和相关市场的市场结构、竞争状况、市场变化等情况，同时经营者不能对其行为一致性作出合理解释时，人民法院也可认定“其他协同行为”形式的横向垄断协议成立。

《司法解释》已于2024年7月1日起正式施行。

文德短评：

《司法解释》通过详尽的法律框架和明确的规则，极大地增强了垄断民事纠纷案件的可操作性和透明度。特别是针对横向垄断协议的“其他协同行为”的详细考量因素和证明规则，为执法提供了清晰的指引，有助于提高执法效率和公正性。此《司法解释》的出台，不仅填补了法律实践中的空白，也体现了我国在加强市场监管和维护公平竞争方面的坚定立场，有助于营造更加公平公正的市场环境。

The Supreme People's Court issued the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Law to the Trial of Monopoly Civil Disputes

The Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Law to the Trial of Monopoly Civil Disputes (hereinafter referred to as the "Judicial Interpretation") consists of six parts and 51 articles. 

The first part covers procedural matters, including the definition of monopoly civil dispute cases, the mode of prosecution, case jurisdiction, combined trial, evidence identification, public interest litigation, suspension of litigation, etc. The second part stipulates the definition of the relevant market,including the principles and requirements of defining the relevant market, the burden of proof, analysis methods, consideration factors and other matters; The third part stipulates the cooperative behavior and agent, drug patent reverse payment agreement, algorithm agreement and cross-platform maximum benefit treatment in the horizontal monopoly agreement,  as well as the burden of proof and the identification of the anti-competitive effect and its exceptions of the vertical monopoly agreement,,the organizational assistance activities and exemption of monopoly agreements and so forth; The fourth part includes the definition of market dominance, the analysis and identification of various types of abuse of dominant market position and other matters; The fifth part stipulates the form of civil liability, determination of loss, effectiveness of  actions, extinctive prescription and other matters of monopoly civil dispute cases.

 It is worth noting that, in view of the horizontal monopoly agreement which has more difficulties in investigating and processing, the Judicial Interpretation specifically stipulates the four factors of "other cooperative behaviors" and the distribution rules of burden of proof. Specifically, the Judicial Interpretation puts forward two methods of judgment and proof rules: "1 + 2 + 4" or "1 + 3 + 4" among the four factors. 

The "1 + 2 + 4" proof rule means that as long as the plaintiff proves that the operator has a consistent market behavior  and that the intention contact, information exchange or transmission between the operators exist, and if the operators cannot make a reasonable explanation for the consistency of  their behavior, the people's court can determine that the horizontal monopoly agreement in the form of "other cooperative behavior" is established. 

The "1 + 3 + 4" certification rule means that as long as the plaintiff proves that the operator has the consistency of market behavior and the market structure, competition status and market changes of the relevant market, and the operator cannot make a reasonable explanation for the consistency of his behavior, the people's court can also determine the establishment of the horizontal monopoly agreement in the form of "other cooperative behavior".

The Judicial Interpretation has officially come into force on July 1,2024.

ZLWD Commentary：

Through the detailed legal framework and clear rules, the Judicial Interpretation has greatly enhanced the operability and transparency of monopoly civil dispute cases. In particular, the detailed consideration of factors and proof rules for the "other  cooperative behaviors" of horizontal monopoly agreements provide clear guidance for law enforcement and help to improve the efficiency and fairness of law enforcement. The introduction of this Judicial Interpretation not only fills the gap in legal practice, but also reflects China's firm position in strengthening market supervision and maintaining fair competition, which helps to create a more fair and just market environment.

《实施意见》明确了8个方面的工作内容。一是加强知识产权法律制度建设。全面贯彻新修订的行政处罚法和《甘肃省行政处罚听证程序规定》，完善行政裁量权基准制度。二是推进知识产权侵权纠纷行政裁决。联合印发《甘肃省加强新时代专利侵权纠纷行政裁决工作的实施方案》，建立专利侵权纠纷繁简分流、快速处理等工作机制。三是推动知识产权纠纷化解社会共治。妥善化解知识产权纠纷。四是推进信息和资源共享。加强知识产权律师、仲裁、公证等领域专业能力建设，探索拓宽公益法律服务领域，鼓励律师协会、公证协会等社会组织开展知识产权法律咨询、宣传、培训、调解等公益服务。

此外，《实施意见》还要求强化鉴定机构对知识产权保护的技术支撑。培育知识产权鉴定机构。共同做好知识产权鉴定机构遴选荐用工作。同时，有效发挥公证机构在知识产权保护中的作用。全面推行“一证一次办”，对法律关系明确、事实清楚、无争议的公证事项一次性办理公证，节约知识产权维权成本。在深化律师知识产权法律服务工作方面，《实施意见》要求支持发展知识产权领域的专业律师事务所。

文德短评：

《实施意见》展示了强化知识产权保护的全面性和系统性。通过加强法律制度建设和完善行政裁量权基准制度，为知识产权保护提供了坚实的法律基础。推进侵权纠纷的行政裁决和建立快速处理机制，提升了执法效率。社会共治和信息资源共享的推动，进一步强化了知识产权保护的社会基础和专业能力。同时，注重鉴定机构、公证机构和律师专业服务的作用，有效降低了维权成本，增强了知识产权保护的实效性。这一系列举措不仅提高了知识产权保护的水平，也为创新环境的优化提供了有力支持。

Gansu Municipal Bureau of Supervision and Provincial Department of Justice jointly issued the Implementation Opinions on Deepening Collaborative Protection and Strengthening Legal Protection of Intellectual Property

"Implementation opinions" made clear 8 aspects of the work content. First,  to strengthen the legal system for intellectual property rights. Fully implement the newly revised Administrative Punishment Law and the Provisions on Administrative Punishment Hearing Procedures of Gansu Province, and improve the benchmark system of administrative discretion. Second,  to promote administrative adjudication on intellectual property rights infringement disputes. Jointly issued the Implementation Plan of Gansu Province to Strengthen the Administrative Adjudication of Patent Tort Disputes in the New Era, and established a working mechanism such as the separation of complicated and simple disputes and the rapid handling of patent infringement disputes. 

Third, to promote the resolution and social governance of intellectual property disputes andresolve intellectual property disputes properly. Fourth,  to share information and resources, strengthen professional capacity  establishing in intellectual property lawyers, arbitration, and notarization, explore ways to expand the field of public legal services, and encourage lawyers' associations, notary associations and other social organizations to provide public services such as intellectual property legal consultation, publicity, training, and mediation.

In addition, the guideline also calls for strengthening the technical support of appraisal institutions for intellectual property protection. Cultivating intellectual property appraisal institutions.Working together in the selection and recommendation of intellectual property appraisal institutions. At the same time, the role of notarial offices in intellectual property rights protection should be effectively played. The "one certificate completed within one time" policy will be fully implemented, and notarial matters with clear legal relations, clear facts and no disputes will be notarized at one time, so as to save the cost of intellectual property rights protection. In terms of deepening lawyers' legal services for intellectual property, the Implementation Opinions call for supporting the development of professional law firms in the field of intellectual property.

ZLWD Commentary：

The Implementation Opinions demonstrate the comprehensiveness and systematization of strengthening intellectual property protection. By strengthening the construction of legal system and improving the benchmark system of administrative discretion, it provides a solid legal foundation for intellectual property protection. The administrative adjudication of infringement disputes and the establishment of a rapid handling mechanism have improved the efficiency of law enforcement. 

The promotion of social co-governance and information resource sharing has further strengthened the social foundation and professional capacity of intellectual property protection. At the same time, it pays attention to the role of appraisal institutions, notarial institutions and lawyers' professional services, which effectively reduces the cost of rights protection and enhances the effectiveness of intellectual property rights protection. These measures have not only improved the level of intellectual property rights protection, but also provided strong support for the optimization of the innovation environment.

7月4日，北京仲裁委员会数字经济仲裁中心于2024全球数字经济大会数据要素高峰论坛上正式揭牌。数字经济仲裁中心由北京仲裁委员会和北京国际大数据交易所共同建设，将在数据先行区管理服务中心（北投台湖产业园）挂牌运营。数字经济仲裁中心将为企业数据价值的合规实现、数据供需的高效匹配提供支持，专业化处理数据纠纷。为配合支持其运行，北仲还同时成立数据仲裁工作组，负责指导制定数据仲裁规则，为遴选数据仲裁员提供咨询建议，指导数字经济仲裁中心的建设发展。此外，建设数字经济仲裁中心是推动北京市“两区”建设的重要举措，有助于利用北京市在数字经济领域的优势和积累，吸引跨境数据交易争议在北京解决，将我国提出的数字经济国际规则通过专业机构的裁决进一步推向国际，提升相关规则的国际影响力。

文德短评：

北京仲裁委员会数字经济仲裁中心的成立，是北京市推动“两区”建设的重要举措，彰显了其在数字经济领域的前沿地位。作为专业化处理数据纠纷的平台，该中心为企业提供合规实现数据价值和高效匹配数据供需的支持，解决数据经济中的复杂争议。北仲的数据仲裁工作组通过制定规则和遴选仲裁员，为中心的专业化运营提供保障，不仅提升了北京市在数字经济领域的吸引力，也推动我国数字经济国际规则的影响力向全球扩展。

The Digital Economy Arbitration Center of the Beijing Arbitration Commission was officially established

Beijing Arbitration Commission and Beijing International Big Data Exchange, will be operated in the Management Service Center of the Data Pilot Zone (North Nantou Taihu Industrial Park). The Digital Economy Arbitration Center will provide support for the compliance realization of enterprise data value, the efficient matching of data supply and demand, and the professional handling of data disputes. 

In order to cooperate and support its operation, Beijing Arbitration Commission also set up a data arbitration working group, which is responsible for guiding the formulation of data arbitration rules, providing advice for the selection of data arbitrators, and guiding the construction and development of digital economy arbitration center. In addition, the construction of digital economy arbitration center is  a important measure to promote the construction of Beijing "two districts", help to use the advantages of Beijing in the field of digital economy and accumulation, attract cross-border data trading disputes to be resolved in Beijing, further promote the digital economy international rules raised by China globally through the ruling of professional institutions,  raise the international influenceof such rules.

ZLWD Commentary：

The establishment of the Digital Economy Arbitration Center of Beijing Arbitration Commission is an important measure of Beijing to promote the construction of "two districts", highlighting its frontier position in the field of digital economy. As a professional platform for handling data disputes, the center provides enterprises with compliance services to realizing data value and efficiently matching data supply and demand to solve complex disputes in data economy. By formulating rules and selecting arbitrators, the data arbitration team guarantees the professional operation of the center, which not only enhances the attractiveness of Beijing in the field of digital economy, but also promotes the influence of China's international digital economy rules to the world.

本次发布的典型案例旨在准确理解《最高人民法院关于审理垄断民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》。具有涵盖内容较为全面（涵盖垄断协议纠纷和滥用市场支配地位纠纷两大垄断纠纷案由）、涉及问题较为广泛（涉及一般横向垄断协议及轴辐垄断协议的认定及效力、有关知识产权行使行为的排除限制竞争效果认定、反垄断行政处罚决定在后继民事赔偿诉讼中的证明力及损害赔偿认定等问题）和案件影响较大（有关案例都受到业内广泛关注，有关涉外案例还具有一定国际影响力）的三大特点。

本次发布的典型案例还体现了三个司法导向，包括严格规制垄断协议，切实维护市场竞争活力、依法确定正当行使知识产权和滥用权利排除限制竞争的界限，实现鼓励创新和维护公平竞争的平衡，以及健全行政执法与司法衔接机制，彰显协同维护公平竞争秩序。

本次发布的典型案例具体如下：

“汽车销售”纵向垄断协议后继诉讼案：缪某与上某汽车销售公司、上海逸某汽车销售服务公司纵向垄断协议纠纷〔最高人民法院（2020）最高法知民终1137号民事判决书〕

涉“枸地氯雷他定原料药专利”滥用市场支配地位案：扬某药业集团广州海某药业公司、扬某药业集团公司与合肥医某医药股份公司等滥用市场支配地位纠纷〔最高人民法院（2020）最高法知民终1140号民事判决书〕

“工业润滑油”轴辐协议案：呼和浩特市汇某物资公司与壳某（中国）公司横向垄断协议纠纷〔最高人民法院（2021）最高法知民终1315号民事判决书〕

涉“稀土永磁材料专利”滥用市场支配地位案：宁波某磁业公司与日本某金属株式会社滥用市场支配地位纠纷〔最高人民法院（2021）最高法知民终1482号民事判决书〕

“交通信号控制机”横向垄断协议案：安徽科某信息产业公司与安徽中某科技股份公司垄断纠纷〔最高人民法院（2024）最高法知民终455号民事判决书〕

文德短评：

最高人民法院发布的5起反垄断典型案例，旨在准确理解《反垄断司法解释》，内容全面且影响广泛。案例涵盖垄断协议和滥用市场支配地位纠纷，涉及横向垄断、知识产权行使、行政处罚等多方面问题，体现严格规制垄断、平衡知识产权与竞争保护、健全行政与司法衔接的司法导向。通过这些案例，不仅为司法实践提供了清晰指引，也增强了市场主体对反垄断法规的理解和遵循，有助于维护公平竞争和市场活力。

The Supreme People's Court has issued five recent typical cases of anti-monopoly in the people's court

The typical cases released this time aim to accurately understand the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Law in the Trial of Monopoly Civil Dispute Cases, which hasthree characteristics including more comprehensive content (covering two major monopoly dispute causes including  monopoly agreement disputes and abuse of dominant market position dispute monopoly disputes), involving more extensive matters (involving the definition and function of general horizontal monopoly agreement and the shaft radiation monopoly agreemen, the intellectual property exercise of restricted competition effect,the anti-monopoly administrative penalty decision in subsequent civil compensation litigation proof and damage compensation issues) and involving cases which have a broader effect (related cases are widely concerned by the industry, the foreign cases also has certain international influence).

The release of the typical case also embodies the three judicial guidance, including strict regulation on monopoly agreements, to safeguard market competition vitality, to determine the exercise of intellectual property rights and abuse the boundaries of restricted competition in accordance with the law, encourage innovation and maintain the balance of fair competition, and improve the mechanism of administrative law enforcement and judicial cohesion, reveal synergy maintain order of fair competition.

The typical cases of this release are specific and are as follows:

"Automobile sales" following litigation of the vertical monopoly agreement: Miao and  Shangcar sales company, Shanghai Yi car sales and service company vertical monopoly agreement dispute: Supreme People's Court (2020) Supreme Court 1137 civil judgment

"Patent of lodecloratadine API" abuse of market position: Dispute between Yang Pharmaceutical Group, Guangzhou Hai Pharmaceutical Group Company, and Hefei Yi Medical Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. related to abuse of market position. Supreme People's Court (2020) Supreme Court No.1140 Civil Judgment

"Industrial lubricating oil"  hub and spoke conspiracy case: Horizontal monopoly agreement dispute between Hohhot City Hui Company and Shell (China) Company Supreme People's Court (2021) Supreme Court 1315 Civil Judgment

Case of abuse of dominant market position involving "rare earth permanent magnet material patent": Dispute over  abuse of dominant market position between a magnetic industry company in Ningbo and a Japanese metal company, Supreme People's Court (2021) No.1482

ZLWD Commentary：

"Traffic signal control machine" horizontal monopoly agreement case: Monopoly dispute between an information industry company of Anhuiand Anhui Zhong Technology Co., Ltd. Supreme People's Court (2024) Supreme Law Court No.455 civil Judgment

The five typical anti-monopoly cases issued by the Supreme People's Court are aimed at accurately understanding the Anti-monopoly Judicial Interpretation, which is comprehensive in content and has a extensive influence. The cases cover monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position disputes, involving horizontal monopoly, intellectual property exercise, administrative punishment and other issues, reflecting the judicial guidance of strict regulation of monopoly, balance of intellectual property and competition protection, and improving the connection between administration and justice.  These cases not only provide clear guidance for judicial practice, but also enhance the understanding and compliance of anti-monopoly laws and regulations, which help to maintain fair competition and market vitality.