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: 永胜县| 石屏县| 宕昌县| 尼勒克县| 玉溪市| 廉江市| 七台河市| 汉寿县| 凤冈县| 莱西市| 绥棱县| 鸡泽县| 华安县| 九龙县| 扎赉特旗| 竹溪县| 邻水| 江川县| 阿图什市| 呼伦贝尔市| 从江县| 深水埗区| 大厂| 广汉市| 上犹县| 河间市| 德令哈市| 宝坻区| 右玉县| 诏安县| 宣汉县| 旬阳县| 平邑县| 乐昌市| 和政县| 恩平市| 望江县| 平泉县| 和平区| 兴安县| 江西省| 松江区| 玉溪市| 大宁县| 周宁县| 永顺县| 门头沟区| 定西市| 赞皇县| 宁都县| 杭州市| 贺州市| 长沙县| 七台河市| 平谷区| 宁明县| 保定市| 巴楚县| 定陶县| 鄢陵县| 吉首市| 高密市| 邢台县| 承德市| 威海市| 邓州市| 乌审旗| 陈巴尔虎旗| 云霄县| 芦山县| 宁远县| 静乐县| 漾濞| 拜城县| 平利县| 黎川县| 鲜城| 沭阳县| 济源市| 大渡口区| 雷州市| 五河县|