Recently, the CPC Central Committee G¥'eneral Office and th ✘e State Council General Offic$®↑γe issued the Opinions on Several ∞♦Issues Concerning the R₩₹♣eform and Innovations in the Trial Ω←¥✘of Intellectual Property Righ×‌ ts. On February 28, the Stat&πe Council held a press conference and≥>α♥ invited Tao Kaiyuan, Vice Preβ≤$‌sident of the Suprem♠↕≈∞e People's Court, to i®¶βntroduce the "opinions" and to answer♥‌ a reporter's question.


Tao Kaiyuan said that Opinions is th€≤ e first milestone programmatic doc€&ument for IP trial issued b♥  ™y China Council and t←≠he State Council and is of great r→βΩealistic significance↕α§ and far-reaching significance foγ↕r accelerating the process of Chi‌ π©na's trial system of inte←↔™llectual property and the modernizati¥★on of judicial powerπ₩≠ in an all-round way The histo ↕≠rical significance.


Solve the "burden of proof, low com±•pensation, long cycle" and♠‌ other issues


The NPC Standing Committe✘ ≤ e's law enforcement in♠∏♥☆spection report on th↕≈✔↑e Patent Law and the Cop$γyright Law pointed out that ther¥‌ ¶e are such problems as "hardπ♠φ evidence, low compensation and lon δ∑g cycle" in the field of intellectual₩× property rights protecti≈≥on. Tao Kaiyuan said that Opinion δ↔insists on problem orientatiα¶‍≥on and goal orientation,★  strengthens the top-level design and f≠∏λ<ocuses on perfecting ¶≠the system of intellectual propertδ♥y litigation, focusing on strength≠≈ πening the construction of the c₽δ★®ourt system of intellect≠©♥←ual property rights, strengthenin‍₽♣↔g the building of the tria×₹©l team of intellectual pr§♠β₽operty rights, and resolvingα♣ the influence and Re&∑βstrict the overall, institutionalε₩Ω and fundamental issu¶↑'es of the judicial protection of ★σintellectual property a£ ✔¶nd greatly enhance the credibility o•≤‍"f the judicial system↑∏ of intellectual propΩ erty.


According to statistics, for the >≥>δfirst time, the number of first-ins✔>©tance IPR cases in courts nati≤ onwide exceeded 200,000 in 2017, u§₩✘p 40.36% from the same period of 2016 ™λ, setting a record high. "The number of≤> intellectual proper÷↓σty judges has not increased si$↔gnificantly, but the number of cases"‍$ concluded and the number of ∞σcases closed have both risen sharpΩ↓§ly, and the rates of retrial ©¶×and trial remission have both declined>≤​×." According to Tao Kaiyuan, the qual↑Ω₽ity of trial in courts is constantly im₩γproving and diversified diσ→sputes The resolution m♠ •≈echanism has also sol£‍ved a large number oβ₹f cases.


"As an institutional arrangε✘πσement and incentive mechanism∞↕₽δ for the property rights☆σ× of innovation, the intellectu♥↕♥al property system is the basi<¶​≠c guarantee for the driving∞↕→ force behind innovation." Tao Kπ≥aiyuan said that judicπβiary is the most effective, fundamenta∞δγl and authoritative tool for protecti××∞λng intellectual property✘₽₽ and "opinions" will "establish a pla↓∞♥≈tform for protecting knowledge As an iγ§mportant part of the guiding id®‍¥eology, property rights is the ε∏♣ concept of protecting‍≥ innovation will fur'δ± ther stimulate the enthusiasm of i₹↑ nnovation in the whole sociδ±ety, promote public entrepren&←‌eurship and innovation, a¶ ‍nd constantly enhance the innov™φation and competitiveness of ∏£<♠our economy.


Reunification of intellectual propert‌☆φy standards


Opinions on the establishment and ©™₽improvement of specialized tr™∞®ial system of intellectual proper​↕γΩty requirements, to achieve t'→ε☆he specialization of the trial of int♦ πφellectual property cases, centraβ↔lized jurisdiction, the proce→≥™dure of intensive and p↓λrofessional staff to fundamentally↓★₹δ solve the referee stand♦★±Ωard of intellectual propπεerty is not uniform, litigat ↕ion procedures Complex and ot≈₩&her constraints on scientific ' γ$and technological innovation systeσ"&m problems.


"Different judgments with the same ÷∑♦case will make the people lose p‍πredictability of the legσεαal consequences." Ac♥‌ ₽cording to Tao Kaiyuan, tΩ☆•↑he people's court mainly γ×₩handled case judgmen∞↓≤βts, formulated judicia★£®l interpretations in a t≈​imely manner, formulated jud‌γicial policies in a timely mΩ←♣anner, issued guiding cases on intell≥₩£¥ectual property rights and cont£π‌inuously strengthene>≤d intellectual property π‌>§rights Judges training and educat±★ ion efforts to ensure ju♦♦dicial unity.


On the introduction of ←εjudicial interpretation, Tao Kaiyuaβ™n said that since the judicial ∑φ≈ interpretation system wa♥λs established, the Supreme Peoβ∑∞ple's Court has formulated 36 judic ©ial interpretations on intell®​ectual property rights. "At pr☆®φesent, there are about 10 judiciδ>al interpretations on β ∑Ωintellectual propert↔♣y rights that are schedul≠₩¶ed on the plan list, It plans toπ∏≥ launch three to four♠÷ projects a year and steadily ×∑push forward the syst→α<em of judicial interpretation>φ€ of intellectual propert•φπy rights. "Tao Kaiyuan sδ"♦εaid that judicial interpretatπ↕ion has provided a stand✘γ​↕ard for promoting accurate and÷•‌ effective enforcement of ≠<☆intellectual property ‌∏ ¥laws and has given the lβ←λower courts a clearer basis for their aπ∏¶ctual operation .


In addition, the "Op≤∏‌∏inion" put forward "perfect case♠β↔≤ guidance system of intellectual prope‍>rty," as one of the wβ☆ ays to referee standards of α×&↓concern. According to reports, since t☆↔∏he establishment of th≤↔≈e case guidance system, up ↔★$ to the end of 2017, among the 9☆σ‍2 guiding cases issued by the₩¶Ω  Supreme People's Court, there ♠σ§were 20 intellectual propβ®&>erty rights involved,₩π→ accounting for more than one σ≥​€fifth of the total. "F™≥or such guidance cases,₽↑≤ we ask the lower courts to 'r✘★☆βefer to the trial of similar case≥​s'," said Tao Kai-yuan.


To create a "preferred"


"Strive to make the Chine≠≥±se courts a" preferred "solut₩↔¥€ion to international intellectual prope÷αrty disputes that the parties trus©∞$t." Tao Taoyuan said the intr∞£≈oduction of "opinions" is an ✘✔∞‌important guarantee for t≤φhe modernization of the IP trial♦ε✘ system and the judicial powerΩ¶.


Tao Kaiyuan believes that in order to ÷<♥become "preferred", it depends α↑¥on a high level of trial quality. T®<he Opinion takes the modernization of ♦≤™the trial system and ↔δthe modernization of the judicia"→l power as its two major gε ↓₹rasps and actively constructs a specialφ₩✔ized trial system for intellectual proΩ∞↔•perty rights so as t≤♥σo create a contingent of γβ®intellectual property judg✘Ωes with a firm political outlook, a com♣©<Ωprehensive understandi↓§ng of the law, a familiarity ™ with technology and an internat ≈ional perspective. He cited the case of∏×≥ Beijing Intellectual Property C₽ ÷ourt as an example. Currently, 30% of ↓£the cases in this hospital are foreign★♦&-related cases, many of which involσ>✘ve parties involved in the foreign affa≥β>irs. "This illustrates from∑★ one aspect that overseas parties ar$‍e more willing to choose from $←→China, especially in the IP cour £≈"t. "


According to reports, the Supreme→¶ People's Court also activel•≥↕≠y participated in and gλ£uided the creation and revision of i£₹σnternational IP govern‍₹↑ance rules through various dialog★ ue platforms, and promoted ←✘≠∞the establishment of intern≠₩ational rules that are more f"λ←>air, just, open and tranπ​sparent. The international influencΩ♥e of China's judicial protection ∞₩φ♦of intellectual property righ'♥ts has been further exp✔​anded, and the image of a respon♦↔sible big country that protects intel★♦'φlectual property rights according₽÷£ to law has been further enhance"σ→d.