On the professional forum of the Service and Trade Association, the Judge Judge shared it like this

In 2022, the service and trade meeting focused on the hot trend of serving trade around the world, focusing on setting up special topics such as green consumption, digital finance, and information technology, and held a number of summit meetings and professional forums. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court once again settled in the site of the Service and Trade Club, in the form of "hosting 1 professional forum, setting up 2 judicial service stations, and publishing 3 keynote speeches" to participate in the service trade and high -quality service service trade.

On the "Industrial Design and Intellectual Property Protection Forum", the Beijing Intellectual Property Court of Intellectual Property Court issued a keynote speech entitled "Issues Related to the Protection of Graphical User Interface". Judge Lan Guohong participated in the keynote speech of the UBBS Business Festival and the Ninth Ring Road Summit and wrote a keynote speech entitled "Discussion on the Boundary of Competitive Behavior of the Digital Economy". Judge Zhou Liting participated in the World Geographical Mark Brand Distribution Service Conference, published a keynote speech entitled "Improving the level of judicial protection of geographical indications and brightening regional brand brand golden business cards". The three judges' speeches issued a Chinese voice of intellectual property protection in an international event in which the global consensus and promoting the transformation of the service trade.

The net matter brings you a summary of the three experts judges, a glimpse of the judicial protection of intellectual property from the essence.

Graphic user interface protection related issues

Rui Songyan, Deputy Director of the Patent Committee of the Beijing Intellectual Property Court and third -level senior judge

The graphic user interface is the newly included appearance design protection content when the patent review guide was modified in 2014. It is also the type design type that is currently the most concerned about innovative subjects, but there are currently some obstacles to the protection of the graphic user interface. In judicial practice, the infringement related to the graphic user interface mainly involves two types. One is the form of software -added hardware. The infringer pre -installed software in the sales terminal. The graphic user interface is the result of the software after the software runs. Such infringements can be adjusted using existing legal frameworks. Another type of infringement is to only provide software downloads. A case involving a computer optimization software in the Beijing Intellectual Property Court belongs to this situation. The patent involved in the case is a computer containing a graphical user interface. The plaintiff believes that the defendant's behavior of software download constitutes direct infringement and help infringement. However, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court considers that because there is no main body in the entire process, no main body has implemented a computer in manufacturing, sales, promised sales, and imports, and imports, including computer interfaces including graphic user interface, so whether it is from the perspective of direct infringement or help infringement from helping infringement The angle cannot support the plaintiff's claim, which is also the dilemma encountered on the current protection of graphic user interface. The main reason for this predicament is that according to the existing regulations, the design includes two elements: product and design, but the behavior of software download does not include product elements. Based on this, under the framework of the current law, the right holder can also consider seeking judicial protection paths outside the patent law.

Digital economy under market competition behavior legitimate border discussion

Beijing Intellectual Property Court 2022 Director of Intellectual Property Judicial Service Station, Director of the Intellectual Property Judicial Service Station, third -level senior judge Lan Guohong

In 2022, it can be said to be the year of the digital economy. The protection of the digital economy and intellectual property rights, especially the competitive behavior of market entities. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court surveyed that there are new problems in the digital economy market competition: inappropriate competition, relying on new generation of digital technologies such as cloud computing, big data, the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, and 5G. New, new technology, and new models; types of improper competition and principles of incorrect competition, infringement of intellectual property behavior and improper competition behavior, illegal monopoly behavior and improper competition behavior; Difficulty in proof, difficult technical facts, difficulty in the results of damage, and difficulty in determining the results of damage.

Faced with the above problems in the digital economy market competition and controversy in judicial practice, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court believes that when defining the legitimate boundary between the digital economy competition behavior, the following factors should be taken. Persist in people -oriented. Although the use of new technologies has blurred the subjective factors of people, it is still used in nature. It is necessary to respect the user's right to know and choose, but also take into account the impact of the interests of other operators. Secondly, data -related competition behaviors should be distinguished and distinguished. Involving different data types of competitive behaviors, the criteria for judgment must be different. They should be treated differently, and technical means and methods should be distinguished. Finally, we must adhere to the balance of interests and prevent it from being lost. The characteristics of the diversification of equity subjects under the digital economy are the application of the principle of balance of interests to propose new challenges. How to balance the protection and open sharing of rights and interests remains to be considered further.

Improve the level of judicial protection of geographical indications

Plumb the regional characteristic brand golden business card

Zhou Liting, Deputy Director of the Technical Survey Office of the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, and third -level senior judge Zhou Liting

Geographical indication is an important type of intellectual property rights and an effective carrier to promote regional economic development. Strengthening the judicial protection of geographical indications and ensuring regional economic development is an important part of the people's court to give full play to the role of trial functions and promote the construction of a new development pattern. Since the establishment of the court in 2014, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court has tried more than 180 geographical logo trademark cases. The overall cases of the case have been authorized to confirm the administrative cases, there are many cases of related civil disputes, and there are many cases of civil disputes, and more foreign -related cases.

In the trial practice, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court focused on highlighting the "strong protection" status of geographical indications. In the "Xiangxi Gold Tea" trademark invalidation case, the court clarified the approximate judgment considerations between geographical logo trademarks. Considering that consumers can correctly identify the geographical sources of the products shown in the product shown in the two geographical indications, and my country has it in China The precedent of coexistence of geographical indication trademarks covered by the production area, so it is determined that the two trademarks can coexist, balance the industrial interests of different geographical signs, and achieve good social effects in the trial of the case. In the "Montanne-St. Emili" trademark authorization case, the court accurately understand the original national protection requirements of foreign geographic signs. On the basis of considering the characteristics and management models of different countries, it is determined that the Bordeaux Wine Commission meets the application collective trademarks to apply for collective trademarks. The subject qualifications, equal protection of the legitimate rights and interests of foreign parties. In response to the difficulties in the trial work of the current geographic sign, such as the identification of the geographical logo trademarks, the general name of the geographical indicator trademark, and the geographical indication civil relief method of unregistered trademarks, Judge Zhou Liting also shared some. She said that the geographical and public characteristics of geographical indications means that the protection of geographic signs is not only a legal issue, but also an economic and policy issue. Give full play to the role of judicial energy. While protecting the geographical signs in accordance with the law, we should balance the demands of the stakeholders and jointly promote the high -quality development of the regional characteristic economy.

Supply: Knowledge Court

Edit: Guo Yumeng Wangxi

- END -