Beijing Intellectual Property Court Affirms Invalidation of Xingning Shixin Lamp Factory’s “Green Lantern” Trademark

Posted on Categories Case, Trademarks

On December 7, 2020, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court announced the affirmance of an earlier Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) ruling invalidating the Xingning Shixin Lamp Factory’s (兴宁市时新灯具厂) “Green Lantern” trademark for damaging the name and title of the Green Lantern movie. Because of prior rights and interests enjoyed by the name, the Court affirmed the TRAB.

Prison for over 200 fraudulent Chinese patent applications yielding 900,000 RMB in government awards

Posted on Categories Case, Utility Model

According to a news report by 知识产权界, on December 3, 2020, the People’s Court of Shehong City, Sichuan heard the corruption and bribery case of defendant Guo, and the corruption case of defendants Chen, Wu, and Wu . The court of first instance sentenced Guo to 6 years and 8 months imprisonment, fined Guo 400,000 yuan, and ordered him to refund the economic losses caused by his corruption. Guo had fraudulently filed and obtained 231 utility model patents and then …

NavInfo Awarded 10 Million RMB in China Copyright Case

Posted on Categories Case, Copyright

On December 3, 2020, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court reversed a lower court decision and awarded Beijing NavInfo Technology Co., Ltd. 10 million RMB (~$1.53 million USD) in damages for a copyright dispute involving electronic maps. The appellees Beijing Qihoo Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing Xiuyou Technology Co., Ltd. and Lead Space Information Technology Co., Ltd. must also pay 500,000 RMB for reasonable expenses and publish an apology.

Guest Post: Contradictory Interpretations of Means-plus-function Claims in China

Posted on Categories Patents

This article a guest post by Xiao HAN (Ms.) and Haoyu (Elliot) ZHOU (Mr.). According to the Chinese Patent Law and practice, means-plus-function claims are interpreted differently at the time of Chinese patent prosecution and Chinese patent litigation. Basically, while “means-plus-function” claims are interpreted as “any means that could achieve the function” by examiner(s) during patent examination (i.e., a broad claim that is difficult to be granted), such claims are merely interpreted as “embodiments disclosed in the Specification, or equivalent …