男女羞羞视频在线观看,国产精品黄色免费,麻豆91在线视频,美女被羞羞免费软件下载,国产的一级片,亚洲熟色妇,天天操夜夜摸,一区二区三区在线电影

Op-Ed Contributors

Court cases indicate better IPR protection

By Haifeng Huang and Tony Chen (China Daily)
Updated: 2011-04-29 07:56
Large Medium Small

For most intellectual property rights (IPR) infringements in China, IPR owners can choose to lodge complaints with administrative agencies or sue in the local courts. But while administrative agencies continue to handle a large portion of IPR infringements, taking cases to court has been a growing trend in recent years, particularly for significant and complex cases.

For example, trademark infringement cases handled by the local administrations for industry and commerce have been fairly stable in terms of numbers: 50,534 in 2006, 50,318 in 2007, 56,634 in 2008, and 51,044 in 2009, with around one-fifth of them filed by foreign parties.

Related readings:
Court cases indicate better IPR protection Experts' voices of IPR issues in China
Court cases indicate better IPR protection IPR trust, communication and cooperation
Court cases indicate better IPR protection China quality regulator combats IPR infringement
Court cases indicate better IPR protection 6,000 people guilty of IPR infringement in 2010

However, there has been a huge increase in the number of trademark infringement cases filed with the courts - 2,521 in 2006, 3,855 in 2007, 6,233 in 2008, and 6,906 in 2009. And that trend is still continuing, as 8,480 cases were taken to court in 2010, a 22.5 percent increase on 2009, according to the White Paper on Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property issued by the Supreme People's Court on April 12, 2011.

What factors are driving this trend?

While administrative agencies can act swiftly and conduct proactive investigations, there are serious "issues" with administrative enforcement: no due process, delays, limited knowledge and resources in handling complex cases, limited deterrence, and the agencies are frequently afraid of being sued by the infringers, which results in deals being struck over penalties in many cases.

Recent policy changes in the Chinese judiciary and its attitudes toward IPR have played an important role in the move toward taking cases to court. "Judicial activism" has been explicitly adopted by the Supreme People's Court in recent years as a formal judicial policy, which requires all levels of courts in China to be more responsive to society's needs and more active in "resolving" issues by utilizing judicial discretion.

   Previous Page 1 2 Next Page  

分享按鈕
主站蜘蛛池模板: 墨竹工卡县| 馆陶县| 象山县| 德州市| 广安市| 独山县| 雷州市| 榆树市| 汉中市| 临澧县| 汉寿县| 渭南市| 湘阴县| 石柱| 融水| 华蓥市| 娱乐| 隆子县| 昆明市| 麻江县| 石河子市| 格尔木市| 民县| 沿河| 深泽县| 高雄县| 林西县| 吴忠市| 财经| 常熟市| 黄石市| 屏南县| 双辽市| 克什克腾旗| 武平县| 霍邱县| 饶平县| 太仆寺旗| 榆中县| 康定县| 聂拉木县| 阳泉市| 米易县| 松潘县| 安康市| 宁波市| 焦作市| 深圳市| 慈利县| 钦州市| 蒙自县| 南投市| 清水县| 凤山县| 葫芦岛市| 府谷县| 南漳县| 和田市| 玉溪市| 安新县| 会昌县| 丘北县| 尤溪县| 永城市| 泾源县| 紫阳县| 阿坝县| 天台县| 金秀| 乌拉特前旗| 镇原县| 翼城县| 长治县| 凯里市| 东辽县| 焦作市| 晋宁县| 铅山县| 永城市| 叙永县| 遵义市| 青州市|