China Releases Typical Cases of Intellectual Property Protection by China Customs in 2024 – China Facing Imported Counterfeits Due to Manufacturing Moving to Other Countries
On April 23, 2025, China’s General Administration of Customs releases their Typical Cases of Intellectual Property Protection by China Customs in 2024 (2024年中国海关知识产权保护典型案例). In contrast to prior years, Customs, in explaining the cases, mentioned two new trends. The first is the export of high-tech products infringing Chinese-owned IP due to the “gradual shift of China’s export momentum from Made in China to Created in China.” The second is that China now needs to block imports of counterfeits due to the “industrial transfer of some labor-intensive commodities.”
A translation follows. The original text is available here (Chinese only).
Case 1: Shenzhen Customs introduced technical investigators to investigate and handle a case of photovoltaic equipment infringement
In September 2024, a new energy equipment company in Shenzhen discovered that a batch of photovoltaic production equipment suspected of infringing its patent right of “a lateral upper and lower boat device” was about to be exported, with a value of RMB 10.79 million, and submitted an application for intellectual property protection to Shenzhen Customs. After reviewing, Shenzhen Customs immediately initiated the protection procedure based on the application, implemented control on the batch of goods and suspended customs clearance. In view of the complex characteristics of the patented technology involved in the goods, the high social attention of the case, and the parties’ disputes over the facts of infringement, Dapeng Customs under Shenzhen Customs contacted the China (Shenzhen) Intellectual Property Protection Center and innovatively introduced technical investigators to assist in law enforcement. Relying on its professional assistance, customs inspection personnel accurately locked the physical goods inspection target, scientifically formulated field inspection plans, and rigorously implemented inspection, evidence collection and detention procedures. This innovative measure not only effectively safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of the right holder, but also minimized the losses that may be caused to the parties by risks such as damage to cargo loading and unloading and delayed delivery. At present, the right holder has filed a lawsuit with the court based on the evidence obtained by the customs inspection.
This case is a typical example of the first successful introduction of technical investigators to implement patent customs protection in the national customs system. The technical investigators, based on the claims and instructions of the patents involved, assisted the customs in inspecting and collecting evidence on the structural components in the equipment related to the patent technology involved. While protecting the rights of the right holder to view the goods, it also further shortened the inspection time and protected the interests of the consignor. It fully demonstrated the professional support role of the technical investigation mechanism for customs protection measures, accumulated valuable experience for the customs system to carry out in-depth patent protection work, and has important demonstration significance for further improving the level of customs protection of intellectual property rights.
Case 2: Shanghai Customs seized a series of infringing foreign trade “new three items” products
In March 2024, the Waigaoqiao Port Customs under Shanghai Customs found 737 solar panels declared as “unbranded” during an inspection of a batch of exported solar panels, suspected of infringing the trademark SUNTECH and graphics, with a value of RMB 243,800. Subsequently, Shanghai Customs further sorted out the export information of photovoltaic products such as solar panels, and seized a total of 2,480 solar panels suspected of infringing the trademark right of “JINKO”, with a value of RMB 1.09 million. After confirmation by the right holder, the above-mentioned goods are all infringing goods. The customs detained the goods in accordance with the law, and made an administrative penalty decision to confiscate the infringing goods and impose a fine after filing an investigation.
In June 2024, Yangshan Customs under Shanghai Customs issued a control order based on the application of the right holder, and carried out precise interception of four batches of exported solar cell modules suspected of infringing its patent rights. 13,730 solar cell modules suspected of infringing its patent rights were seized, with a value of RMB 6.28 million. The customs detained the goods in accordance with the law.
The “new three” of foreign trade, represented by new energy vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaic products, have gained new export advantages with new technologies and new products, reflecting the gradual shift of China’s export momentum from Made in China to Created in China. Photovoltaic products, as the new energy application power supply for the green and low-carbon transformation of energy, have gradually become a “new business card” for stabilizing foreign trade. Customs cracks down on photovoltaic products that infringe trademark rights based on factors such as “high brand awareness, serious infringement status, and relatively clear infringement clues” to maintain corporate brand reputation; comprehensively uses the linkage processing mechanism of “risk control + comprehensive + on-site” to crack down on photovoltaic products that infringe patent rights, protect corporate scientific and technological innovation achievements and transformation and upgrading momentum, and contribute customs strength to the high-quality export of the “new three” products of foreign trade.
Case 3: Hangzhou Customs launched a rapid response mechanism for major cases to coordinate enforcement and seize infringing drill bits
In July 2024, Yiwu Customs under Hangzhou Customs found590,600 drill bits with the SKF and graphic trademark and 59,300 drill bits with the “DORMER” trademark when inspecting a batch of export goods. Due to the large number and high valuation of this batch of drill bits, the customs immediately activated the rapid response mechanism for major cases. After confirmation by the right holder, the batch of drill bits were all infringing goods. The customs detained the goods and filed a case for investigation in accordance with the law. The case handlers keenly noticed that the purchase transaction list and transfer records of the drill bits involved in the case submitted by the consignor were only 80,000 RMB, which was a big gap from the general market situation. They judged that 80,000 RMB was only a deposit, not the actual transaction price of the goods. The customs promptly fixed the key evidence involved in the case, such as the sales contract and freight entrustment agreement, assisted the public security organs in carrying out infringement identification and price identification, and actively promoted the public security organs to conduct criminal investigations. In October 2024, the public security organs formally filed a case for investigation. After the relevant departments determined that the batch of drill bits was worth RMB 955,700. The case is still under further investigation, and the public security organs have taken criminal coercive measures against the suspect.
The rapid response mechanism for major cases is an effective means for customs to deal with cases with large numbers or case values, strong public response, public opinion attention, and involving major or sensitive commodities. In this case, the customs case officers, relying on their rich experience in handling cases, promptly activated the rapid response mechanism for major cases and smoothly promoted the public security organs to file a case. This is a typical case in which customs and public security organs deepened the “enforcement connection” of intellectual property protection and jointly cracked down on infringement and illegal criminal activities throughout the chain.
Case 4: Xiamen Customs builds a strong “entry” protection network to seize a series of infringing condiments
In April 2024, Quanzhou Customs under Xiamen Customs found 139,100 bags of sour soup powder, monosodium glutamate, fried chicken powder and other condiments using the “KNORR” and “AJINOMOTO” trademarks when inspecting a batch of export goods. After confirmation by the right holder, the above-mentioned goods were infringing goods. The customs detained the goods in accordance with the law, and made an administrative penalty decision to confiscate the infringing goods and impose a fine after filing an investigation. While investigating the case, Xiamen Customs focused on “imported” infringing goods, formed an expert team to carry out special infringement risk assessment, screened customs clearance data and case information, conducted a comprehensive analysis of route characteristics and logistics trends, extracted high-risk infringement characteristics, and strengthened control and analysis of key commodities. In June and November of the same year, a total of 213,600 bags of chicken essence that infringed the exclusive rights of the “AJINOMOTO” and “Maggi” trademarks were seized again.
”Food is the first necessity of the people, and food safety is the first priority.” Food safety is always the top priority in the field of people’s livelihood. In this series of cases, the customs started with one infringement case that was discovered, screened high-risk commodities through big data analysis, and conducted special control. Two batches of similar infringing condiments were discovered one after another, effectively blocking the infringing goods from entering the international market, which reflects the customs’ implementation of the “no strictest, only stricter” law enforcement standard in the field of food safety. This series of cases effectively safeguards the health and safety of consumers and the international reputation of Chinese products, and is a typical example of the customs’ heavy blow to “imported” infringing commodities.
Case 5: Beijing Customs and other customs promote integrated protection to escort cultural and creative products to go overseas
In December 2024, Beijing Customs carried out precise training for Beijing Pop Mart Cultural and Creative Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Pop Mart), and analyzed the industry and regional infringement trends in detail for the infringement of cultural and creative enterprises in the jurisdiction, extracted the characteristics of the categories, channels and trading countries of infringing goods, and carried out cross-customs information sharing with the help of the intellectual property customs protection working group mechanism, and assisted relevant customs in strengthening the analysis and control of infringement risks. In the same month, customs in many places successively seized 9 batches and 140,000 pieces of cultural and creative products suspected of infringing the copyright of “Labubu” and other copyrights, with a value of RMB 170,000.
In July 2024, the General Administration of Customs established a working group mechanism for customs protection of intellectual property rights, and local customs shared information, studied clues, and established an integrated intellectual property protection pattern. As a representative enterprise of China’s trendy culture “going overseas”, Pop Mart has been in short supply in Southeast Asian countries as China’s cultural and creative IP has increased its global influence. In this case, the customs encouraged cultural and creative enterprises to carry out customs filing, improve the effectiveness of rights protection, and form a strong joint force to combat infringement and protect innovation through cross-customs coordinated law enforcement. This case is a typical example of customs deepening the integrated protection of intellectual property rights and escorting cultural and creative products “going overseas”.
Case 6: Guangzhou Customs seized a series of cases involving imported infringing sporting goods
In 2024, there will be a large number of international sports events, and the risk of infringement of sports goods will increase. In January 2024, Nansha Customs under Guangzhou Customs found 13,000 footballs with trademarks such as “MOLTEN”, “ERREA” and “KIPSTA” with a value of RMB 415,000 when inspecting the goods declared for import by a trading company. After investigating the case, Guangzhou Customs sorted out and controlled similar goods imported from the same country. In July of the same year, Panyu Customs under Guangzhou Customs found 3,079 footballs with the “MOLTEN” trademark when inspecting goods imported from the same country by another trading company. The goods were worth RMB 101,000. After confirmation by the right holder, the above-mentioned goods were all infringing goods. The customs detained the goods in accordance with the law, and made an administrative penalty decision to confiscate the infringing goods and impose a fine after filing an investigation.
With the industrial transfer of some labor-intensive commodities, the role of intellectual property protection in the import link has become increasingly important. Customs across the country adheres to the working concept of “strict protection, large-scale protection, fast protection, and common protection”. By refining the characteristics of infringement, analyzing the manifest information, locking the logistics routes, and implementing precise control, it effectively blocks the infringing sports goods from entering the domestic market, effectively maintains the normal trade order of the domestic market, and supports the development of China’s sports industry. This series of cases reflects the customs officers’ profound understanding and professionalism of protecting intellectual property rights, and is a typical case of customs actively combating infringement and illegal acts in the import link.
Case 7: Huangpu Customs and other customs agencies cooperated efficiently to seize the case of transshipping infringing sports shoes
In November 2024, Huangpu Customs received a report from the right holder that a batch of infringing sports shoes were about to be declared for export from the customs. Huangpu Customs gave full play to the two core advantages of data resources and data models, and used the customs’ intelligent risk control shipping trajectory monitoring and analysis function to track the container trajectory in real time. After discovering that the batch of goods had been shipped and left the port for Hong Kong, Huangpu Customs contacted Hong Kong Customs through the Guangdong Branch of the General Administration of Customs to monitor and intercept the container. Hong Kong Customs found out that the container had been transferred to Shenzhen for export, and immediately notified Shenzhen Customs of the information. Shenzhen Customs further found out that after the container changed ships midway, it successfully seized more than 13,000 pairs of infringing sports shoes using trademarks such as “TIMBERLAND”, with a value of RMB 235,800.
The Decision of the CPC Central Committee on Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform and Promoting Chinese-style Modernization, which was reviewed and approved at the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, proposed to “deepen cooperation in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and strengthen the connection of rules and mechanisms”. In response to the new trend of drifting infringing goods, the customs of Guangdong and Hong Kong quickly shared risk information in cross-customs and cross-regional joint law enforcement, implemented control and interception at all levels, and cooperated in case investigations, forming a relatively mature customs protection and law enforcement cooperation mechanism for intellectual property rights. This case is a typical example of close cooperation between the customs of Guangdong and Hong Kong to protect intellectual property rights, reflecting the responsibility of customs to serve the high-quality development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.
Case 8: Qingdao and Ningbo Customs seized a series of cases involving infringing goods exported to African countries
In October 2024, Huangdao Customs under Qingdao Customs seized 68 infringing refrigerators in two batches exported to Libya, with a value of RMB 204,600, and refrigerators with the Pepsi graphic trademark logo. The customs quickly launched the “execution connection” mechanism and transferred the case to the public security organs. At present, the public security organs have merged the two cases for investigation.
In October 2024, Beilun Customs under Ningbo Customs found 1.19 million welding rods with the ” ” (graphic) trademark logo, with a value of RMB 178,500, when inspecting a batch of goods for export to Ghana. After confirmation by the right holder that the above goods were infringing goods, the customs quickly secured evidence and transferred the case to the public security department.
In September 2024, the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation Summit was successfully held in Beijing. The Forum on China-Africa Cooperation-Beijing Action Plan (2025-2027) proposed to “expand cooperation with African customs in areas such as customs clearance facilitation, law enforcement and capacity building, and jointly combat infringement and counterfeiting” and other illegal and criminal acts. In September of the same year, the General Administration of Customs deployed the “Special Action for Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Africa (2024)” in customs across the country. The above cases fully demonstrated the law enforcement results of the special action, strengthened the intellectual property protection awareness of export enterprises, and maintained the good image of Chinese brands and “Made in China” in African countries. It is a concentrated reflection of the customs’ implementation of the national intellectual property power strategy and service to major power diplomacy.
Case 9: Chengdu, Urumqi and Gongbei Customs seized infringing goods from cross-border e-commerce channels
In January 2024, Chengdu Shuangliu Airport Customs under Chengdu Customs discovered suspected infringing boots using trademark logos such as “UGG” during an inspection of a batch of exported cross-border e-commerce goods. Subsequently, it strengthened control over the same enterprise and seized 473 pieces of shoes and bags using the same trademark logo, which were confirmed as infringing goods by the right holder.
In July 2024, Alashankou Customs under Urumqi Customs discovered 1,050 handbags using the “PINK” trademark logo during an inspection of a batch of exported cross-border e-commerce goods, which were confirmed as infringing goods by the right holder.
In December 2024, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Customs under the Gongbei Customs discovered 4,054 cigarettes with trademarks such as “Yunyan” and “MARLBORO” hidden in lamps during an inspection of a batch of exported cross-border e-commerce goods. They were confirmed as infringing goods by the right holder.
China’s cross-border e-commerce has grown from small to large in scale, and its quality has become stronger and better, and has become a new highlight in China’s foreign trade and global trade. Customs has strengthened its crackdown on infringing goods in cross-border e-commerce, effectively safeguarded the legitimate interests of right holders and consumers, and escorted the healthy and orderly development of the new cross-border e-commerce business. This series of cases is a typical example of customs strengthening intellectual property protection in the new cross-border e-commerce business.
Case 10: Nanjing, Tianjin and Dalian Customs accurately applied the “Criteria for Administrative Penalty Discretion of the Customs of the People’s Republic of China (III)” series of cases
In December 2023, Xinshengwei Customs under Nanjing Customs found that 141 jerseys and other goods used the MANCHESTER CITY 1894 and graphics trademark logo when inspecting a batch of exported goods, with a value of RMB 4,240.85. After confirmation by the right holder, the batch of goods was infringing goods, and the customs detained the goods and filed a case for investigation in accordance with the law. During the investigation of the case, the “Discretion Benchmarks for Administrative Penalties of the Customs of the People’s Republic of China (III)” (hereinafter referred to as “Discretion Benchmarks (III)”) were promulgated and implemented. The customs investigation determined that the party met the provisions of Article 7, paragraph 1, item 4 of the “Discretion Benchmarks (III)” that “the number of imported and exported goods that infringe intellectual property rights is less than 200 pieces and the value is less than 5,000 yuan, the party acknowledges in writing that the goods are infringing goods, voluntarily abandons the infringing goods and hands them over to the customs for handling in accordance with the law”, and made a decision not to impose administrative penalties in January 2024, ordering the party to immediately fulfill the obligation not to import and export infringing goods and educate them.
In December 2023, Xingang Customs under Tianjin Customs found 72 bicycles with the “FOREVER” trademark logo when inspecting a batch of export goods, with a value of RMB 9,299.06. After confirmation by the right holder, the above-mentioned goods were infringing goods, and the customs detained the goods and filed a case for investigation in accordance with the law. During the investigation of the case, the “Discretion Criteria (III)” was promulgated and implemented. The customs investigation determined that the party was a first-time offender, and met the provisions of Article 8 of the “Discretion Criteria (III)” that “the number of infringing goods imported and exported is less than 500 pieces and the value is less than 10,000 yuan, the party acknowledges in writing that the goods are infringing goods, voluntarily abandons the infringing goods and hands them over to the customs for handling in accordance with the law”. The first violation can be exempted from punishment. In January 2024, a decision was made not to impose administrative penalties, ordering the party to immediately fulfill the obligation not to import and export infringing goods and educate them.
In April 2024, Dayaowan Customs under Dalian Customs found that 10 sets of bearings used the “NTN” trademark when inspecting a batch of exported bearings, with a value of RMB 1,444. The right holder confirmed that the above-mentioned goods were infringing goods. The customs detained the goods and filed a case for investigation in accordance with the law. It was found that the party had been punished by the customs twice for exporting infringing goods within one year before the incident. It met the provisions of Article 12 of the Discretion Criteria (III) that “after being administratively punished by the customs for violating Article 25 of the “Regulations on the Implementation of Customs Administrative Penalties”, the same act of violating customs supervision regulations was committed within one year”. In June 2024, an administrative penalty of confiscating the infringing goods and imposing a fine of 25% of the value of the goods was imposed.
The Discretion Benchmark (III) is a specific measure for the customs to implement the decision-making arrangements of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on regulating administrative discretion, and provides a guiding and normative discretion benchmark for the customs to strictly, standardize and fairly handle intellectual property cases. Since the implementation of the Discretion Benchmark (III), the national customs have accurately applied different levels of discretion according to the facts, nature, circumstances and degree of social harm of the illegal acts, reflecting the legislative spirit of proportionate punishment and leniency and severity, which is of great significance to improving the fairness and transparency of administrative penalties, protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, and promoting the standardization and professionalization of customs law enforcement.
The Hypocrisy of “Delete IP”: Billionaire Frustrations Masquerading as Policy
Jack Dorsey’s recent tweet, “delete all IP,” and Elon Musk’s echo, “I agree,” are not serious policy proposals—they’re the petulant grumblings of billionaires frustrated that intellectual property laws are interfering with their ambitions. These statements are particularly rich coming from men whose companies have aggressively accumulated intellectual property rights: According to the USPTO’s database, Dorsey’s Twitter secured 410 U.S. patents, while Musk’s Tesla amassed 879. Their current distaste for IP conveniently arises now that their market dominance makes such protections less essential—for them.
Both Dorsey and Musk are deeply involved in artificial intelligence, a field that relies heavily on vast amounts of written material—much of it copyrighted—for training models. Whether this use constitutes copyright infringement is currently being litigated. If courts finally determine that it is infringement, the implications for AI development could be substantial. Of course, developers could turn to public domain materials, but if that’s the route, be prepared for your AI assistant to start speaking in “forsooths,” “prithees,” and “perchances.” The obvious (and apparently odious) alternative? Pay fair value for the content being used.
Musk once told Jay Leno, “patents are for the weak.” There’s a kernel of truth there—not because patents are inherently flawed, but because they level the playing field. Patents exist precisely to empower the weak: to incentivize inventors and protect them as they challenge entrenched giants. Abraham Lincoln famously described patents as having “added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius.” Patents don’t just reward inventors—they give entrepreneurs the confidence to invest in the risky business of innovation.
While Dorsey and Musk may be targeting copyright more than patents, the principle remains the same. Copyright is designed to reward creators by granting them property rights over their work—rights that encourage the creation and dissemination of culture and knowledge. As poet Joel Barlow eloquently argued in 1783, after authors dedicate their lives to honing their craft, it is a matter of “natural justice” that they should profit from their labor and reputation.
This principle was enshrined in the U.S. Constitution on March 4, 1789, when Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 gave Congress the authority “[t]o promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” Congress exercised this power almost immediately with the Patent Act of 1790 and the Copyright Act of the same year.
For over 235 years, intellectual property has fueled innovation, creativity, and economic growth in America. The call to “delete all IP” reeks of a “pull up the ladder” mentality—a cynical effort by technology oligarchs who benefited from IP protections to now deny them to others, simply because they’ve become inconvenient. If Musk and Dorsey are as visionary as they claim, they should propose a fair compensation system for AI training. Don’t blow up the system that nurtured generations of inventors and authors—build something better.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The National Law Review.
Pitfalls to Avoid Before Filing an Offensive Patent Litigation Case
Whether or not filing an offensive patent litigation is the right course of action for your business can be a complicated strategic question, involving analysis of seemingly-endless and sometimes-conflicting factors. Often patent owners focused on an answer to the ultimate question of whether to file a suit overlook the many pitfalls that may arise during their pre-filing investigations. Those pitfalls can devalue a potential enforcement opportunity and create unnecessary challenges later during litigation.
Below are a few tips for patent owners who are considering patent enforcement:
Contact a knowledgeable patent litigator as early as possible. Many patent litigators will take an initial “quick look” at a patent or patent portfolio without charge. Even if the case isn’t a potential fit for their law firm, they can often steer you to an attorney or firm that may be a better match for your potential case and help guide you from the outset.
Be mindful of creating work product or communicating with third parties without an attorney. An attorney’s work product performed in anticipation of litigation does not have to be produced during discovery. A non-attorney’s work product (that was not done at the direction of an attorney) is unlikely to be protected and may have to be produced during discovery. This means drafts of patent analyses prepared by a non-attorney, which may be based on incomplete information and prepared without a working understanding of patent law, may later have to be produced. And such documents could be used to undermine your case.
Even “Confidential” communications are subject to discovery during litigation. Communications between a client and their attorney related to legal advice are privileged and do not have to be produced during discovery. In contrast, communications between a patent owner and a third party are not privileged, even if they are confidential. Confidential documents and communications are required to be produced during discovery, although access to confidential information can be restricted through the use of protective orders.
AI is not a substitute for an attorney, and your communications with AI-tools may not be confidential. While AI-tools may be able to direct you to useful information – like this blog post – many nuances exist in the law that may apply to the specific circumstances of your business and may not be reflected in the publicly-available information that is intended for a general audience. Also, most AI-tools are not confidential and your queries are used to further train the tool. Also keep in mind that your communications with the tool are not protected from discovery. Do not put any information that you would consider confidential into such tools.
Implement a document retention program for your organization. If you are anticipating filing patent litigation, ensure that you are preserving documents and emails. Ask your attorney for an appropriate “litigation hold” for your organization. Be aware that “documents” may also apply to “things” such as prototypes that embody your patented invention.
Collect relevant materials. Collect relevant documents that demonstrate your invention story, establish critical timelines, reflect the suspected infringement, and support the monetary value of your innovations and potential damages (such as past licenses or offers to license, proceeds related to any patented products, valuations of the patents, industry valuations, or estimated sales of the infringing products). Doing some initial leg work will allow counsel to evaluate your potential case more quickly, provide you with a better assessment of any potential enforcement action, and hopefully avoid unwelcome surprises later.
Mark your patented or licensed products. If you sell a product covered by a patent, it must be marked with “patent” and the number, as explained in 35 U.S.C. § 287. Failure to mark as required may bar recovery of pre-suit damages, unless the accused infringer was notified of the infringement.
Don’t play your hand in the public forum. If you intend to pursue patent enforcement actions, do not post on blogs, social media, and other public forums about your plans, what your patents cover, or threaten legal action. You may find yourself later facing unfair competition claims or have your posts used against you during discovery. Or you may find your company is sued defensively by an infringer in a declaratory judgment action before you and your attorneys are ready to file.
Ask questions. There are many different approaches, strategies, ways to structure patent litigation, and ways to manage a business’s specific risk concerns. If you don’t know what questions to ask your attorney, AI-resources may be extremely useful to help you generate a list of questions. For example, try this prompt: You take the role of in-house counsel. Generate a list of questions to ask a law firm to develop a patent litigation strategy that is aligned with a [insert product, services, or industry sector, such as “semiconductor”] company’s goal of protecting innovations around [insert a specific feature or product] and specifically focused on [costs, fees, budget, venue, risk management, PTAB, counterclaims, timing, coordination with foreign actions or entities, or other general business objectives].
Leveraging and Protecting Trade Secrets in the 21st Century
How does the Colonel protect his ‘11 herbs and spices’ recipe?
Why did Coca-Cola never patent its recipe?
Why won’t the New York Times divulge its definition of a ‘best seller?’
Trade secrets are integral to the competitive edge of many businesses, encompassing a wide array of confidential information such as customer lists, formulas, processes, and strategic plans. Effectively managing and safeguarding these assets is paramount in today’s dynamic business environment. This article delves into the nuances of trade secrets, offering insights into their definition, protection strategies, and legal considerations.
Defining Trade Secrets
A trade secret is broadly defined as information that is not generally known or readily ascertainable, derives independent economic value from its secrecy, and is subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its confidentiality. This encompasses a wide range of information, including formulas, practices, designs, instruments, patterns, or compilations of information used in business to gain a competitive advantage.
Allan Grafman of Oberon Securities describes a trade secret as, “a business advantage you don’t want anyone else to know about.”
Legal Framework for Trade Secrets
Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA)
The UTSA, adopted by the majority of US states, provides a uniform legal framework for the protection of trade secrets. It defines key terms and outlines remedies for misappropriation, including injunctive relief and damages. The act emphasizes the necessity for businesses to take reasonable measures to maintain the secrecy of their information.
Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)
Enacted in 2016, the DTSA establishes a federal cause of action for trade secret misappropriation, allowing companies to pursue legal remedies in federal court. Notably, it includes provisions for the seizure of property to prevent the dissemination of trade secrets and offers protections for whistleblowers.
Nicole Galli, a seasoned trade secret litigator, emphasizes that many innovations deserve layered protection: patent, copyright, trade secret. It’s not a binary choice, but a strategy. This underscores the importance of a comprehensive intellectual property strategy that considers multiple forms of protection.
Patent vs. Trade Secret: Making the Right Choice
Deciding between patenting an invention and maintaining it as a trade secret involves careful analysis. Patents provide exclusive rights but require public disclosure, whereas trade secrets can offer indefinite protection without disclosure, provided they remain confidential.
Eric Curtin, a patent attorney at Crawford Maunu, notes that if the secret is easy to reverse-engineer — like a new gadget — a patent might make more sense, but for a formula or internal process that can be kept behind closed doors, a trade secret could offer longer-lasting protection.
This decision should be informed by factors such as the nature of the invention, the likelihood of independent discovery, and the competitive landscape.
Valuing Trade Secrets
Understanding the economic value of trade secrets is crucial for businesses. Several approaches are employed to assess this value:
Cost Approach: Considers the cost incurred in developing the trade secret or the expense to recreate it.
Market Approach: Evaluates comparable market transactions involving similar trade secrets.
Income Approach: Estimates the present value of future economic benefits derived from the trade secret.
Determining the fair market value involves assessing its financial impact on the business, reflecting what the trade secret would be worth in an open market transaction.
Protecting Trade Secrets: Best Practices
To safeguard trade secrets effectively, businesses should implement a comprehensive strategy that includes the following:
Identification: Clearly identify and document what constitutes a trade secret within the organization.
Access Control: Limit access to trade secrets to essential personnel and implement robust security measures.
Employee Training: Educate employees about the importance of trade secrets and their role in protecting them.
Legal Agreements: Utilize non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and confidentiality clauses to legally bind employees and partners.
Monitoring and Enforcement: Regularly monitor the use of trade secrets and be prepared to enforce rights through legal action if necessary.
Eric Curtin emphasizes the importance of practicality. Policies should be clear and easy to follow to ensure that the business can continue to comply.
Legal Remedies for Misappropriation
In instances of trade secret misappropriation, several legal remedies are available including:
Injunctive Relief: Courts can order the cessation of unauthorized use or disclosure of trade secrets.
Damages: Compensation for actual losses and unjust enrichment resulting from the misappropriation.
Attorney’s Fees: In cases of willful and malicious misappropriation, courts may award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party.
The UTSA and DTSA provide frameworks for these remedies, emphasizing the need for businesses to act promptly and decisively when misappropriation is discovered.
A notable example of the application of trade secret law is the case of Motorola Solutions, Inc. v. Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd. When Motorola alleged that Hytera misappropriated its trade secrets by hiring former employees who disclosed proprietary information, the court awarded Motorola significant damages, highlighting the seriousness with which courts view trade secret misappropriation and the substantial financial and reputational risks involved.
Conclusion
Trade secrets are invaluable assets that require diligent identification, protection, and enforcement. It’s in a business’s interest to figure out where it falls on the continuum. Not every company has major trade secrets — but many already do without even realizing it. Recognizing and safeguarding these assets is not just a legal obligation but a strategic imperative in today’s business environment. By understanding the legal frameworks, implementing robust protection strategies, and staying vigilant against misappropriation, businesses can maintain their competitive edge in the marketplace.
To learn more about this topic view Leveraging & Protecting Trade Secrets in the 21st Century. The quoted remarks referenced in this article were made either during this webinar or shortly thereafter during post-webinar interviews with the panelists. Readers may also be interested to read other articles about trade secrets and intellectual property.
This article was originally published here.
©2025. DailyDACTM, LLC d/b/a/ Financial PoiseTM. This article is subject to the disclaimers found here.
RAW Confusion? No Error Where Trial Court Declines to Clarify Agreed Jury Instruction
The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s jury verdict that found trade dress infringement and liability under state deceptive practices law, and the court’s order entering a nationwide permanent injunction. The Seventh Circuit found the district court’s agreed jury instruction accurate and determined that there was no error in refusing to further clarify the instruction for the jury. Republic Techs. (NA), LLC v. BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP, Case No. 23-2973 (7th Cir. Apr. 25, 2025) (Hamilton, Scudder, Lee, JJ.)
Republic Technologies and BBK Tobacco are competitors in the business of organic, hemp-based rolling papers for cigarettes. Republic manufactures and markets its own papers under the name OCB, and BBK markets papers manufactured by others, including its house brand, RAW. After BBK formally requested that Republic change its OCB trade dress to avoid potential confusion with the RAW trade dress, Republic sued for a declaratory judgment of noninfringement, unfair competition, and deceptive advertisement under the federal Lanham Act, Illinois common law, and the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (IUDTPA). BBK filed a counterclaim for trade dress infringement and copyright infringement.
At trial, the parties agreed on the jury instruction for the Lanham Act false advertising claim. However, during deliberations, the jury asked for clarification on the definition of “consumer.” Over Republic’s objection, the district court answered the jury’s question by stating that “the answers are contained in the instructions,” and directed the jury “to refer to and review all the instructions.” The jury returned a mixed verdict, finding against Republic on the federal false advertising claims but finding for Republic on its common law and IUDTPA claims. Republic then sought, and the district court granted, a permanent injunction that set limitations on the statements BBK was permitted to make in its advertisements.
On BBK’s counterclaim of trade dress infringement, the jury found that Republic’s trade dress for its OCB papers infringed BBK’s trade dress for its RAW papers. Republic moved for judgment as a matter of law of noninfringement and for a new trial on its false advertising claim based on the disputed answer to the jury’s question. The court denied both motions. Both parties appealed.
On appeal, the Seventh Circuit affirmed on all issues. First, the Seventh Circuit ruled that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its response to the jury’s question or in denying the request for a new trial because a trial judge’s responsibility is to strike “a balance between giving the jury all it needs but without unnecessary detail” and the judge’s answer in this case did not result in the prejudice necessary for a reversal.
Second, the Seventh Circuit reviewed the evidence presented to the jury concerning the trade dress infringement claim and determined that substantial evidence supported the jury’s verdict and the verdict was not irrational. Republic argued that it was not reasonable to confuse the OCB packaging with the RAW packaging “given the prominent display of the brand names in great big letters in the center of the package,” but these different letters and names were just one factor for the jury to weigh and not enough to defeat a claim as a matter of law.
Finally, the Seventh Circuit considered BBK’s cross appeal concerning the district court’s injunction, which BBK contended was vague and overbroad due to its nationwide scope despite the IUDTPA claim being based on Illinois state law. In rejecting both arguments, the Court ruled that there was no abuse of discretion by the trial court because the injunction provided a substantial amount of guidance on what statements were permitted in BBK’s future advertising and because the nationwide scope was within the equity powers of the court, which “may command persons properly before it to cease or perform acts outside its territorial jurisdiction.”
No Supremacy Clause Preemption Where State Statute Doesn’t Conflict With Federal
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit explained that ordinarily, when state law contradicts with federal law, the state law may be preempted by the federal law under the US Constitution’s Supremacy Clause. However, under Supreme Court precedent, state unfair-competition laws that accurately mirror the relevant provisions of federal law are not subject to preemption. Zyla Life Sciences, LLC v. Wells Pharma of Houston, LLC, Case No. 23-20533 (5th Cir. April 10, 2025) (Oldham, Ho, Duncan, JJ.)
Under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq., no one may sell any new drug without prior approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Because compounded drugs are not new but are merely remixed versions of existing drugs, registered compounding facilities are allowed to sell compounded drugs as long as they satisfy additional criteria specified in the FDCA. Six states mirror federal law by making it illegal to sell any new drug without FDA approval and provide for suit under traditional state unfair-competition law if a party sells drugs in violation of these state laws.
Zyla and Wells Pharma are competitors. Zyla sells FDA-approved suppositories containing indomethacin, a drug used to treat various ailments such as rheumatoid arthritis. Wells Pharma sells compounded indomethacin suppositories that are not FDA approved, but Wells Pharma is a registered compounding facility and thus satisfies at least one provision of the exemption. Zyla, seeking to enjoin Wells Pharma from manufacturing and selling its compounded suppositories in the six states mirroring the FDCA, filed suit under those states’ unfair-competition laws. Wells Pharma moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(6), arguing that the state laws were preempted. After the district granted the motion, Zyla appealed.
The issue before the Fifth Circuit was whether the state laws conflict with the FDCA by incorporating it. As the Court explained, a state triggers implied “[o]bstacles-and-purposes preemption . . . when state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.” Here, (quoting the California statute) the six state statutes at issue bar selling a “new drug” that has not been approved “under Section 505 of the [FDCA].” The Fifth Circuit, citing the 1949 Supreme Court decision in California v. Zook as controlling, concluded that where there is no conflict in statutory terms between the state and federal statutes, there is no preemption. Both a state and the federal government may regulate the same conduct – whether a state has provided an additional remedy in state law is irrelevant – and the FDCA itself permits states to regulate conduct related to drug safety and effectiveness concurrently with the federal government.
The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s order granting Wells Pharma’s motion to dismiss and remanded the case.
Paint It White: No Sovereign Immunity in Economic Espionage Case
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s denial of foreign sovereign immunity to a Chinese company accused of stealing trade secrets related to the production of proprietary metallurgy technology. United States v. Pangang Grp. Co., Ltd., Case No. 22-10058 (9th Cir. Apr. 29, 2025) (Wardlaw, Collins, Bress, JJ.)
Pangang is a manufacturer of steel, vanadium, and titanium. E.I. du Pont de Nemours (DuPont) had a proprietary chloride-route technology used for producing TiO₂, a valuable white pigment used in paints, plastics, and paper. Pangang allegedly conspired with others to obtain DuPont’s trade secrets related to TiO₂ production through economic espionage in order to use the stolen information to start a titanium production plant in China. The US government filed a criminal lawsuit.
In defense, Pangang invoked the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) and federal common law, arguing that it was entitled to foreign sovereign immunity from criminal prosecution in the United States because it was ultimately owned and controlled by the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In a prior appeal, the Ninth Circuit had found that Pangang failed to make a prima facie showing that it fell within the FSIA’s domain of covered entities. On remand, the district court again rejected Pangang’s remaining claims of foreign sovereign immunity, including its claims based on federal common law.
While the appeal was pending, the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Turkiye Halk Bankasi v. United States clarified that common law, not the FSIA, governs whether foreign states and their instrumentalities are entitled to foreign sovereign immunity from criminal prosecution in US courts. This led to a rebriefing of the present appeal to focus on the now-controlling issues concerning the extent to which Pangang enjoys foreign sovereign immunity under federal common law. Under federal common law, an entity must satisfy two conditions to enjoy foreign sovereign immunity from suit:
It must be the kind of entity eligible for immunity.
Its conduct must fall within the scope of the immunity conferred.
The Ninth Circuit concluded that Pangang did not make a prima facie showing that it exercised functions comparable to those of an agency of the PRC and therefore was not eligible for foreign sovereign immunity from criminal prosecution. The Court also found that “[t]he mere fact that a foreign state owns and controls a corporation is not sufficient to bring the corporation within the ambit of [sovereign immunity].” Since Pangang’s commercial activities were not governmental functions, there was no evidence that sovereign immunity should be applied. Therefore, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity.
No Green Light to Register Color Mark for Medical Gloves
Addressing for the first time the test for determining whether a color mark is generic, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit adopted the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board’s Milwaukee test as the appropriate standard, affirming the Board’s determination that a dark green color mark used on medical examination gloves was generic. In re PT Medisafe Technologies, Case No. 2023-1573 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 29, 2025) (Prost, Clevenger, Stark, JJ.)
PT Medisafe filed an application to register a dark green color mark for use in connection with medical examination gloves:
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) examining attorney refused registration, alleging that the mark was not inherently distinctive and therefore required a showing of acquired distinctiveness. In response, Medisafe submitted evidence in support of acquired distinctiveness, including a declaration from a Medisafe vice president, promotional literature, and examples of competitive goods. The examining attorney was not swayed, issuing another office action stating that the mark had not acquired distinctiveness and was generic. Medisafe submitted additional evidence in support of acquired distinctiveness, including additional declarations, but the examining attorney ultimately issued a final office action refusing registration.
On appeal, the Board applied a two-step test to determine whether the applied-for color mark was generic:
What is the genus of the goods or services at issue?
Is the color “so common within the relevant genus that consumers would primarily associate it with the genus rather than as indicating a unique source of goods [or services] within the genus?”
This test, which was first articulated in the Board’s 2019 decision in Milwaukee Electric Tool v. Freud America, is a “slight variation” of the standard test for genericness set forth in the Federal Circuit’s 1986 decision in H. Marvin Ginn v. International Ass’n of Fire Chiefs, modified for use specifically with color marks.
The Board found that the appropriate genus was “all chloroprene medical examination gloves” and the relevant public included “all such people or businesses who do or may purchase chloroprene medical examination gloves.” The Board likewise agreed with the examining attorney that the color mark was generic because “it is so common in the chloroprene medical examination glove industry that it cannot identify a single source.”
The Board cited 25 examples of third parties using the same or a similar dark green color on medical examination gloves. Medisafe claimed that 15 of those 25 examples were Medisafe gloves, but the Board nonetheless affirmed the refusal, noting that “Medisafe made no such claim as to the other 10,” and “all 25 screenshots [are] probative of genericness because the relevant consumer – even including unspecified ‘authorized resellers’ – could be exposed to . . . gloves that appear under a large number of third-party marks without identifying [Medisafe] as the source or manufacturer.” Medisafe appealed to the Federal Circuit.
Medisafe argued that the Board applied the wrong standard in determining that the mark was generic and attacked the Milwaukee test because it “ignores statutory language . . . allow[ing] for cancellation of a mark for genericness only where that mark is a ‘generic name.’” The Federal Circuit disagreed, noting that “trade dress, including a color mark, which cannot serve as an indicator of source is generic and unprotectable,” and that “any narrower interpretation of ‘generic name’ would . . . accord trade dress more protection than a word mark under the Lanham Act.”
Adopting the Milwaukee test as the appropriate standard to assess color marks for genericness, the Federal Circuit concluded that substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that the applied-for mark was generic. The Court did not address acquired distinctiveness, as a generic mark is “ineligible for registry on either the principal or supplemental registers” and “cannot acquire distinctiveness.”
New Administration, Same Patent Reform Bill
A bipartisan group of senators and congressional representatives reintroduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), which aims to reform the law of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. PERA seeks to address the challenges posed by recent Supreme Court decisions and restore clarity and predictability in the US patent system.
PERA preserves the existing categories of subject matter currently enumerated in § 101 but adds several categories of excluded subject matter. PERA proposes to eliminate all judicial exceptions to patent eligibility, specifying that certain categories, such as mathematical formulas that are not part of an invention, processes that a human could perform, mental processes, unmodified human genes, and unmodified natural material, are not eligible for patents.
A separate bipartisan group of senators and congressional representatives reintroduced the Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act, which aims to protect and increase the value of US intellectual property rights by making significant reforms to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board.
PREVAIL seeks to limit Board challenges to entities that have been sued or threatened with a patent infringement lawsuit, close the statutory bar joinder loophole to prevent time-barred entities from joining instituted inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, and prevent serial petitions by applying estoppel at the time the challenge is filed instead of when the Board issues its final written decision.
“Payment Handler”: A Nonce Term Without Instructions
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that a software term was a “nonce” term that invoked 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph (i.e., a means-plus-function claim element). The Court further found that the patent specification did not recite sufficient corresponding structure, rendering the claim element indefinite. Fintiv, Inc. v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., Case No. 23-2312 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 30, 2025) (Prost, Taranto, Stark JJ.)
Fintiv sued PayPal for infringing four patents related to cloud-based transaction systems, also known as “mobile wallet platforms,” “mobile financial services platforms,” or “electronic payment systems.” During claim construction, the district court ruled that the terms “payment handler” and “payment handler service” were indefinite. The court concluded that both terms were means-plus-function limitations governed by § 112, sixth paragraph. Although the claims did not use the word “means,” the district court found that PayPal had demonstrated that the terms were drafted in a format consistent with traditional means-plus-function language, effectively substituting “payment handler” for the word “means.” The court also found that the patent specifications failed to disclose corresponding structure capable of performing the claimed functions. As a result, the court held the claims invalid for indefiniteness and entered final judgment. Fintiv appealed.
Fintiv argued that the district court erred in concluding that the payment handler terms invoked § 112(f) and that the specifications failed to disclose the structure for the claimed functions. The Federal Circuit disagreed.
The Federal Circuit analyzed the “payment-handler” terms, which did not explicitly use the word “means.” Under § 112(f), there is a rebuttable presumption that a claim term does not invoke means-plus-function treatment unless the challenger can show that the term is a nonce term that lacks “sufficiently definite structure” or only recites a function without providing enough structure to perform that function. Fintiv contended that the payment handler terms, both individually and collectively, identified the required structure. However, the Court found that PayPal had successfully rebutted the presumption since the payment handler terms recited functions without reciting sufficient structure to perform those functions. The Court agreed with the district court that the term “handler” did not convey sufficient structure to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Having determined that the payment handler terms invoked § 112(f), the Federal Circuit sought to identify the corresponding structure described in the specifications for performing the payment handler function but found none. The Court concluded that “without an algorithm to achieve these functionalities – and, more generally, given the specifications’ failure to disclose adequate corresponding structure – we hold the payment-handler terms indefinite.”
Damages on Default Judgment Not Barred by Absence of Precise Amount in Complaint
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court decision, allowing collection of actual damages in a default judgment where the complaint only sought damages “in an amount to be determined at trial.” AirDoctor, LLC v. Xiamen Qichuang Trade Co., Ltd., Case No. 24-215 (9th Cir. Apr. 11, 2025) (Friedland, J.) (Berzon, Kennelly JJ., concurring) (per curiam).
AirDoctor produces and sells air purification products, including branded filters designed specifically for its machines. In 2022, AirDoctor discovered that Xiamen Qichuang Trade had sold tens of thousands of unauthorized replacement filters that were marketed as compatible with AirDoctor products. These filters were allegedly labeled with AirDoctor’s registered trademarks, including AIRDOCTOR and ULTRAHEPA, without permission. AirDoctor asserted that these actions constituted trademark infringement, false advertising, and unfair competition under the Lanham Act and related state laws.
AirDoctor filed a complaint seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages “in an amount to be determined at trial.” Xiamen did not respond or appear in the litigation, and the court entered a default judgment against it. AirDoctor subsequently moved for approximately $2.5 million in actual damages, calculated based on the number of infringing units sold, along with $50,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs. The district court entered a default judgment in Air Doctor’s favor but declined to award damages or attorneys’ fees. The court reasoned that Fed. R. Civ. Pro 54(c) barred monetary relief in default judgments unless the complaint demanded a specific sum. Since AirDoctor’s complaint did not include a precise dollar amount, the court concluded that granting the requested monetary relief would exceed what was demanded in the pleadings and thus violate Rule 54(c). AirDoctor appealed.
The issue before the Ninth Circuit was whether the district court erred in interpreting Rule 54(c) to prohibit an award of actual damages in a default judgment where the complaint requested “damages in an amount to be determined at trial” but did not specify a fixed damages amount. Xiamen did not appear on appeal either.
The Ninth Circuit reversed, concluding that Rule 54(c) does not require a complaint to state a specific sum of damages for a court to award actual damages after a default judgment. The Court emphasized that the rule’s purpose is to prevent awards that are fundamentally different in kind or amount from those for which the defendant had been put on notice by the complaint, not to deny recovery when the type of relief was clearly identified, even if the amount was not. The Court noted that AirDoctor had clearly requested actual damages in its complaint and had indicated that the precise amount would be determined later, which was sufficient to give Xiamen fair notice of the relief sought. Relying on its 1974 decision in Henry v. Sneiders, the Court reaffirmed that actual damages may be awarded in default cases even if the complaint does not state a dollar figure, as long as the damages are of the same kind as those demanded.
The Ninth Circuit clarified that Rule 54(c) should not be read to require technical pleading of monetary amounts, especially in cases where the exact damages are unknown at the time of filing and are to be determined based on later evidence. The panel pointed out that this approach is consistent with decisions from other circuits, including the Seventh Circuit.
Practice Note: This decision affirms that in cases decided by default, a plaintiff can recover actual damages without having included a sum certain in its pleading, provided that the type of relief is sufficiently disclosed. Therefore, where actual damages are not immediately apparent at the time of filing a complaint, the plaintiff can comply with Rule 54(c) (while leaving the door open to maximize recovery) by pleading a prayer for recovery in an amount commensurate with findings at trial.
China Issues the 2025 Intellectual Property Nation Building Promotion Plan To Accelerate the Construction of a Powerful Intellectual Property Country
On May 7, 2025, China’s National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) published the 2025 Intellectual Property Nation Building Promotion Plan (2025年知识产权强国建设推进计划) authored by the Office of the Inter-ministerial Joint Conference on Building a Powerful National Intellectual Property Rights. The Plan lists the key tasks of 2025 to “accelerate the construction of a powerful intellectual property country.” Some of the key tasks including revising various laws and regulations, including the Trademark Law and issuing new guidelines, such as the Guidelines on Standard-Related Patent Policy.
A translation follows. The original text is available here (Chinese only).
This plan is formulated to implement the Outline for Building a Powerful Intellectual Property Country (2021-2035) (hereinafter referred to as the Outline) issued by the CPC Central Committee and the State Council and the National Intellectual Property Protection and Utilization Plan for the 14th Five-Year Plan (hereinafter referred to as the Plan) issued by the State Council, deepen the implementation of the strategy of building a powerful intellectual property country, accelerate the construction of a powerful intellectual property country, and clarify the key tasks for 2025.
This plan is formulated to implement the Outline for Building a Powerful Intellectual Property Country (2021-2035) (hereinafter referred to as the Outline) issued by the CPC Central Committee and the State Council and the National Intellectual Property Protection and Utilization Plan for the 14th Five-Year Plan (hereinafter referred to as the Plan) issued by the State Council, deepen the implementation of the strategy of building a powerful intellectual property country, accelerate the construction of a powerful intellectual property country, clarify the key tasks for 2025.
I. Improve the intellectual property system(I) Improve intellectual property laws, regulations and rules1. Accelerate the revision of the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on the Protection of Integrated Circuit Layout Designs. (The National Intellectual Property Administration and the Ministry of Justice are responsible)2. Accelerate the revision of the Regulations on the Implementation of the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on Collective Management of Copyrights, accelerate the revision of the Trial Measures for Voluntary Registration of Works, and promote the formulation of the Regulations on the Protection of Copyright of Folk Literature and Art Works. (The Central Propaganda Department and the Ministry of Justice are responsible)3. Promote the revision of the Regulations on the Protection of New Plant Varieties of the People’s Republic of China. (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the National Forestry and Grassland Administration, and the Ministry of Justice are responsible)4. Study and demonstrate the Regulations on the Management of Access to Biological Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. (The Ministry of Ecology and Environment is responsible)5. Promote the revision of the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights. (General Administration of Customs is responsible)6. Promote the legislative process of the Regulations on the Protection of Traditional Chinese Medicine Knowledge. (State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, National Health Commission, National Intellectual Property Administration is responsible)7. Promote the revision of the Regulations on National Defense Patents. (Equipment Development Department of the Central Military Commission, State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense is responsible)8. Revise and issue the Regulations on the Protection of Trade Secrets. (State Administration for Market Regulation is responsible)9. Promote the revision of relevant judicial interpretations of the Trademark Law and Copyright Law. (Supreme People’s Court is responsible)
(II) Reform and improve major intellectual property policies10. Open up the entire chain of intellectual property creation, application, protection, management and service, and promote the establishment of an efficient comprehensive intellectual property management system. (National Intellectual Property Administration and relevant member units of the Joint Conference are responsible)11. Do a good job in the preparation of the “15th Five-Year Plan” intellectual property planning. (National Intellectual Property Administration and relevant member units of the Joint Conference are responsible)12. Promote the implementation of the “Reform Plan for the Division of Financial Powers and Expenditure Responsibilities between the Central and Local Governments in the Field of Intellectual Property”. (Ministry of Finance, National Intellectual Property Administration, Central Propaganda Department and other departments are responsible)13. Study and summarize the results of the World Bank’s business environment assessment, and issue and implement the “Opinions on Further Optimizing the Business Environment in the Intellectual Property Field”. (The National Intellectual Property Administration, the Central Propaganda Department, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the State Administration for Market Regulation, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible)14. Formulate the “Guiding Opinions on Accelerating the High-quality Development of Copyright Work”. (The Central Propaganda Department is responsible)15. Formulate and issue the “Guidelines on Standard-related Patent Policy”. (The State Administration for Market Regulation and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)16. Formulate high-quality policy documents to promote the rapid and coordinated protection of intellectual property rights, study and issue guiding opinions on strengthening the arbitration of intellectual property disputes, and formulate guidelines for administrative adjudication and mediation of patent disputes. (The National Intellectual Property Administration and the Ministry of Justice are responsible)17. Study and formulate opinions on strengthening the protection of trade secrets. (The State Administration for Market Regulation is responsible)18. Formulate and issue the “Opinions on Strengthening the Intellectual Property Protection Work of Public Security Organs”. (The Ministry of Public Security is responsible)19. Accelerate the promotion of the “Measures for the Identification of Synthetic Content Generated by Artificial Intelligence” and the issuance of supporting mandatory national standards. (The Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission and the Ministry of Public Security are responsible)20. Issue and implement the “Implementation Plan for Major Biodiversity Conservation Projects (2025-2030)”. (Ministry of Ecology and Environment is responsible)
(III) Improve intellectual property rules in emerging and specific fields 21. Accelerate the research and construction of data intellectual property protection rules. (National Intellectual Property Administration and Ministry of Industry and Information Technology are responsible)22. Carry out the revision of the “Patent Examination Guidelines” and improve the patent examination standards for new fields and new formats. (National Intellectual Property Administration is responsible)23. Explore and improve the intellectual property protection rules for new fields and new formats such as big data, artificial intelligence, and blockchain. Improve the intellectual property protection rules in the Internet field. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission, the Supreme People’s Court, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the State Administration for Market Regulation, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible for their respective duties)24. Accelerate the improvement of judicial judgment rules for intellectual property rights in new technologies, new fields, and new formats, and judgment rules for e-commerce platform competition cases, and explore judicial rules for big data competition protection. (Supreme People’s Court is responsible)25. Support the free trade pilot zones to connect with international high-standard economic and trade rules, carry out pilot projects first, and replicate and promote them to a larger scale. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Commerce, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)26. Explore the copyright protection of traditional culture and traditional knowledge, and improve the copyright protection mechanism of sports events, variety shows, e-commerce platforms, and search engines. (The Central Propaganda Department is responsible)27. Actively explore the application of technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain in the confirmation, use, and protection of copyright in the fields of radio, television, and online audio-visual, and strengthen the development of blockchain application standards and related standards in the fields of radio, television, and online audio-visual. (The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the State Administration of Radio, Film, and Television are responsible according to their respective duties)28. Study and formulate guiding opinions on strengthening intellectual property work in the fields of culture and tourism. (The Ministry of Culture and Tourism, the Central Propaganda Department, the State Administration for Market Regulation, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible)29. Continue to promote the construction of a database for the protection of traditional Chinese medicine knowledge and the publication of a list.(The State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine is responsible)
II. Strengthen intellectual property protection(I) Strengthen judicial protection of intellectual property30. Issue the “Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on Serving and Safeguarding Scientific and Technological Innovation with High-quality Trials” and publish typical cases. (The Supreme People’s Court is responsible)31. Improve the national level intellectual property case appeal mechanism and strengthen the construction of a professional trial system. (The Supreme People’s Court is responsible)32. Adhere to strict protection, improve and fully implement the punitive compensation system for infringement. Strengthen the overall coordination of batch litigation and increase the crackdown on manufacturers and other sources of infringement. (The Supreme People’s Court is responsible)33. Formulate the “Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in Handling Criminal Cases of Intellectual Property Infringement”. (The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate are responsible)34. Deepen the comprehensive performance of intellectual property prosecution and further promote the professionalization of intellectual property prosecution. (The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is responsible)35. Formulate the “Management Measures for Technical Investigators of the Intellectual Property Procuratorate Office of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate” and improve the system of intellectual property prosecution professionals assisting in case handling. (The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is responsible)36. Regularly carry out supervision of malicious intellectual property litigation and publish typical cases of intellectual property prosecution protection. (The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is responsible)37. Organize and carry out special projects such as “Kunlun-2025” and “Anxin” to continue to crack down on intellectual property infringement crimes with high pressure. (The Ministry of Public Security is responsible)
(II) Strengthen administrative protection of intellectual property38. Carry out the “Sword Net 2025” special action to combat online infringement and piracy, and carry out special work on youth copyright protection and cinema film copyright protection. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism are responsible for their respective duties)39. Carry out in-depth special law enforcement actions to “protect intellectual property rights”. Promote the pilot work of full-chain law enforcement of intellectual property rights. (The State Administration for Market Regulation is responsible)40. Organize and carry out market competition status assessments in key areas, and strengthen anti-monopoly supervision of standard essential patents, patent pools, etc. in key areas such as information and communications before, during, and after the whole chain. (The State Administration for Market Regulation is responsible)41. Deepen the national pilot work on trade secret protection innovation and form institutional results that can be replicated and promoted. Organize and carry out the third “Enterprise Trade Secret Protection Capacity Improvement Service Month” activity. (The State Administration for Market Regulation is responsible)42. Strengthen the construction of geographical indication review capabilities. Promote the construction of national geographical indication protection demonstration areas with high standards, and implement the geographical indication protection project in depth. (The State Intellectual Property Office is responsible)43. Continue to clean up and rectify infringement, counterfeiting, illegal and irregular information, urge websites and platforms to fulfill their main responsibilities, and improve the ability to review content related to intellectual property rights. (The Central Propaganda Department and the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission are responsible according to their respective responsibilities)44. Improve the early resolution mechanism for pharmaceutical patent disputes. (The National Intellectual Property Administration and the State Food and Drug Administration are responsible according to their respective responsibilities)45. Continue to strengthen the protection of seed industry intellectual property rights, and severely crack down on counterfeiting, counterfeiting, infringement and other illegal acts. Strengthen the construction of technical support capabilities, improve the DNA molecular fingerprint database, and promote the implementation of variety ID card management. (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs is responsible)46. Organize and carry out special actions for customs protection of intellectual property rights, and accelerate the construction of customs smart intellectual property business scenarios. (The General Administration of Customs is responsible)47. Continue to consolidate the results of software legalization work and carry out software legalization supervision work. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the State Administration of State Administration and other units are responsible according to their respective responsibilities)48. Strengthen intellectual property protection in the field of intangible cultural heritage. (The Ministry of Culture and Tourism is responsible)
(III) Improve the pattern of coordinated protection of intellectual property rights49. Strengthen the connection between administrative law enforcement and judicial protection and cross-departmental and cross-regional law enforcement cooperation. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, the General Administration of Customs, the State Administration for Market Regulation, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the National Forestry and Grassland Administration are responsible for their respective duties)50. Implement the intellectual property protection system construction project, guide the construction of intellectual property protection highlands, and optimize the layout of national intellectual property protection centers and rapid rights protection centers. (The National Intellectual Property Administration is responsible)51. Promote the construction of a national pilot project for the standardization of administrative adjudication of patent infringement disputes. (The National Intellectual Property Administration and the Ministry of Justice are responsible)52. Promote the establishment of an efficient foreign-related intellectual property protection work mechanism, improve the overseas dispute response guidance work system, and set up a number of overseas intellectual property dispute response guidance sub-centers. (The National Intellectual Property Administration, the Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Commerce, and the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade are responsible)53. Continue to promote the diversified resolution of intellectual property disputes, strengthen the construction of intellectual property dispute mediation organizations and arbitration institutions, and improve the docking mechanism between intellectual property administrative law enforcement and arbitration and mediation. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Supreme People’s Court, the Ministry of Justice, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade are responsible according to their respective duties)54. Manage the transfer of intellectual property rights involving national security in accordance with the law, and study and formulate guidelines for the review of the transfer of patent rights in technology exports. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the Ministry of Commerce, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the National Forestry and Grassland Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)55. Improve the credit supervision system in the field of intellectual property rights in accordance with the law, and strengthen the collection and sharing of relevant credit information in the field of intellectual property rights. (The Central Propaganda Department, the National Development and Reform Commission, the People’s Bank of China, the State Administration for Market Regulation, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)56. Promote the political and legal organs to crack down on crimes involving intellectual property protection in accordance with the law, and investigate and deal with infringements in accordance with the law. (The Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission is responsible)
III. Improve the operation mechanism of the intellectual property market(I) Improve the quality of intellectual property creation57. Promote the improvement of the quality of patent applications, improve the quality-oriented indicator system and evaluation system, and establish a pre-patent application evaluation system with industrialization prospect analysis as the core. (The Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible according to their respective duties)58. Continue to improve the quality and efficiency of patent and trademark examinations, optimize resource allocation, meet the examination needs of key areas, and steadily promote the application of multimodal large model technology in examination work. Deepen the reform of the trademark examination and approval mechanism, and launch a new generation of trademark examination system. (The State Intellectual Property Office is responsible)59. Study and promote the construction of a unified national copyright registration mechanism for works, standardize the standards and processes for copyright registration and examination of works, enhance the informatization level of copyright registration of works, and continuously improve the quality of copyright registration of works. (The Central Propaganda Department is responsible)60. Improve the work system of intellectual property rights to support key core technology research and development, deepen the patent navigation in key areas, and strengthen the creation and layout of high-value patents. (The State Intellectual Property Office, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible)61. Study and improve the supporting system for intellectual property management of national science and technology plan projects, and do a good job in intellectual property management of national key R&D plan projects. (The Ministry of Science and Technology and the competent departments of each project are responsible according to their respective responsibilities)62. Optimize the acceptance and examination process of new plant variety rights, improve the online application and examination system, and improve the efficiency of authorization. (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs and the National Forestry and Grassland Administration are responsible according to their respective responsibilities)
(II) Strengthen the transformation and application of intellectual property rights63. Deeply implement the special action of patent transformation and application. On the basis of the previous review and inventory of existing patents, strengthen data sharing among departments, strengthen the precise connection between supply and demand, continue to activate the existing stock, optimize the incremental stock, promote the strengthening and efficiency of intellectual property rights in key industries, summarize experience and practices, and form a long-term mechanism. (The Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the National Health Commission, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible for their respective duties)64. Vigorously cultivate and develop patent-intensive industries and copyright industries. Carry out the accounting and publication of the added value of patent-intensive industries. Conduct a survey on the contribution of copyright industries to the national economy. (The National Bureau of Statistics, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the Central Propaganda Department are responsible for their respective duties)65. Promote the construction of key industry intellectual property innovation consortiums, key field patent pools, and intellectual property operation centers in an integrated manner, and create a model for patent industrialization to promote the growth of small and medium-sized enterprises. Accelerate the high-quality development of the science and technology service industry, cultivate and expand high-level science and technology service institutions, create a national unified technology transaction service platform, accelerate the transformation and industrialization of scientific and technological achievements, and help small and medium-sized enterprises innovate and develop. (National Intellectual Property Administration and Ministry of Industry and Information Technology are responsible)66. Deepen the reform of intellectual property rights distribution, study and promote the pilot experience of the reform of empowering the rights of scientific and technological achievements in official positions and the reform of separate asset management, and promote the establishment of a due diligence exemption mechanism. (Ministry of Education, Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Finance, State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, National Intellectual Property Administration, and Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible according to their respective duties)67. Promote the implementation of the declaration system for the formation of intellectual property rights in financially funded scientific research projects. (National Intellectual Property Administration, Central Propaganda Department, Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Finance, National Natural Science Foundation of China, State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense, and Equipment Development Department of the Central Military Commission are responsible)68. Promote the construction of a “center + node” university scientific and technological achievement transformation system with the national university regional technology transfer and transformation center as the hub and the national university science and technology park as the node, build a “full chain” public transformation platform, and strengthen the construction of intellectual property professional service teams. (Ministry of Education is responsible)69. Deepen the implementation of the patent open licensing system and promote more scientific and technological achievements from laboratories to the industrial chain. (National Intellectual Property Administration, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, and Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible)70. Dynamically optimize the patent ranking index system of central enterprises, and guide central enterprises to strengthen the creation, application and protection of high-value patents. Encourage central enterprises to strengthen industry-university-research cooperation, and cultivate high-value patents through innovation alliances and other means. (SASAC and the State Intellectual Property Office are responsible)71. Vigorously implement the trademark brand strategy, and deepen the action of geographical indications to help rural revitalization. (The State Intellectual Property Office is responsible)72. Promote the quality grading of agricultural products with geographical indications and promote quality improvement. (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs is responsible)73. Continue to carry out pilot work on the protection and promotion of folk art copyrights. (The Central Propaganda Department is responsible)74. Accelerate the implementation of the substantial derivative variety system, formulate guidelines for the determination of substantial derivative varieties and the first batch of substantial derivative variety system catalogs, and preliminarily select a batch of appraisal institutions. (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs and the National Forestry and Grassland Administration are responsible according to the division of responsibilities)75. Continue to promote the implementation of intellectual property standards by units affiliated to the Chinese Academy of Sciences. (The Chinese Academy of Sciences is responsible)76. Promote the construction of intellectual property service export bases. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Commerce, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible for their respective duties)
(III) Promote the market-oriented operation of intellectual property77. Actively and steadily develop intellectual property finance, give full play to the role of the national intellectual property pledge information platform, and coordinate the promotion of intellectual property pledge financing, securitization, and insurance. (The Central Propaganda Department, the National Development and Reform Commission, the People’s Bank of China, the Financial Regulatory Commission, the China Securities Regulatory Commission, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible for their respective duties)78. Gradually expand the internal evaluation pilot of intellectual property pledge financing and improve the level of convenience for intellectual property pledge registration. Guide local governments to increase support for intellectual property financing guarantees. (The Central Propaganda Department, the People’s Bank of China, the Financial Regulatory Commission, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible for their respective duties)79. Encourage insurance companies to optimize intellectual property insurance products and services and focus on developing insurance products related to international trade intellectual property protection. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Financial Regulatory Commission, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible for their respective duties)80. Improve the supervision system for intellectual property asset securitization business, guide exchanges to innovate intellectual property asset securitization models, and encourage technology-based enterprises to carry out financing through intellectual property asset securitization. (The China Securities Regulatory Commission, the Central Propaganda Department, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible)81. Promote the benefit of new varieties of forest and grassland plants to farmers and pledge financing of variety rights. (National Forestry and Grassland Administration, People’s Bank of China)
IV. Improve the efficiency of intellectual property services(I) Strengthen the supply of intellectual property public services82. Deeply implement the intellectual property public service benefit project, and solidly promote the pilot of intellectual property public service standardization. Establish and improve the “good and bad review” system for intellectual property government services. (National Intellectual Property Administration)83. Promote the establishment of an intellectual property public service work mechanism to support the key core technology research in key areas. (National Intellectual Property Administration)84. Study and formulate the “Guidelines for the Analysis and Utilization of Intellectual Property Information”. (National Intellectual Property Administration)85. Launch the national intellectual property protection information platform, explore the construction of a national integrated intellectual property digital public service platform, support the construction of an independent and controllable intellectual property database, and expand the open sharing of basic data. (National Intellectual Property Administration)86. Promote the connection and application of intellectual property-related public service platforms with the national network identity authentication public service platform to strengthen user information security. (National Intellectual Property Administration, Ministry of Public Security)87. Optimize the service application scenarios of grassroots organizations of the patent information resource system and empower grassroots intellectual property services. (China Association for Science and Technology is responsible)
(II) Promote the development of intellectual property services88. Comprehensively strengthen the supervision of the intellectual property agency industry, strengthen the comprehensive governance of the industry, and improve the professional capabilities and level of intellectual property service institutions. (National Intellectual Property Administration is responsible)89. Accelerate the formation of a standard system for the intellectual property service industry, promote the construction of intellectual property service industry clusters, and establish a regional cooperation and assistance mechanism for the intellectual property service industry. (National Intellectual Property Administration is responsible)90. Promote the use of the “Patent and Trademark Agency Service Government Procurement Demand Standard (Trial)”. (Ministry of Finance and National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible)91. Strengthen and improve the supervision of copyright collective management organizations, guide copyright collective management organizations to expand their business, and encourage copyright collective management organizations to cooperate with relevant industry associations. Promote the standardization of certification work by overseas copyright certification agencies. (Central Propaganda Department is responsible)
V. Create a good intellectual property humanistic and social environment(I) Vigorously advocate intellectual property cultural concepts92. Organize and hold large-scale activities such as World Intellectual Property Day, National Intellectual Property Promotion Week, China International Copyright Expo, International Copyright Forum, and China Brand Day. We will do a good job in building a strong country in intellectual property rights and publicize the achievements of intellectual property development during the 14th Five-Year Plan period. We will strengthen external publicity of intellectual property rights through platforms such as the China International Import Expo and the China International Fair for Trade in Services, and tell the story of Chinese intellectual property rights well. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Commerce, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the State Administration for Market Regulation, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade are responsible for their respective duties)93. Organize activities related to the 40th anniversary of the implementation of the Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China. (The National Intellectual Property Administration is responsible)94. Promote the implementation of the “whoever enforces the law shall popularize the law” responsibility system in all regions and relevant departments, and strengthen the publicity of intellectual property law. Strengthen the use of new media and new technologies, and actively carry out popularization of law through cases in China’s popularization of law “one network, two microblogs, and one terminal”. (The Ministry of Justice is responsible)95. Make full use of important time nodes such as the National Science Popularization Month, the National Science and Technology Activity Week, and the National Intellectual Property Promotion Week to carry out intellectual property science popularization activities. Relying on the China Science Popularization Information Platform, strengthen the all-media dissemination of intellectual property science popularization resources. (The Ministry of Science and Technology and the China Association for Science and Technology are responsible)96. Carry out a series of publicity activities on customs protection of intellectual property rights, and release the status of intellectual property protection in China’s customs in 2024. Optimize the functional layout of the customs intellectual property protection exhibition center, and create an “Internet +” intellectual property customs protection publicity position. (The General Administration of Customs is responsible)
(II) Lay a solid foundation for the development of intellectual property rights97. Increase the training of intellectual property administrative personnel and build a high-quality professional cadre talent team. (The Central Propaganda Department and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)98. Deepen the implementation of the professional and technical personnel knowledge update project, and increase the training of high-level professional and technical personnel in the field of intellectual property rights. Improve the intellectual property talent evaluation system and the professional title evaluation method for intellectual property professionals. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)99. Vigorously cultivate international talents such as foreign-related intellectual property lawyers. (The Ministry of Justice and the National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible according to their respective duties)100. Promote the construction of intellectual property professional degrees and related disciplines in colleges and universities, do a good job in the construction of the co-construction of intellectual property colleges, and strengthen the collaborative training of intellectual property talents. (The Ministry of Education, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the Central Propaganda Department are responsible according to their respective duties)101. Strengthen the construction of technical managers, expand the scale of training, improve the quality of training, and promote the transformation and industrialization of scientific and technological achievements. (Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology)102. Promote the construction of intellectual property think tanks and strengthen research on major theoretical and practical issues. (Central Propaganda Department, Supreme People’s Court, Ministry of Education, National Intellectual Property Administration, Chinese Academy of Sciences are responsible according to their respective duties)
VI. Deeply participate in global intellectual property governance103. Carry out consultations in various fields under the framework of the World Intellectual Property Organization, promote the formulation of international rules for intellectual property in new fields and new formats, and promote the inclusion of Chinese language consultations in the Madrid system. (National Intellectual Property Administration, Central Propaganda Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Justice)104. Organize the 2025 series of cooperation directors’ meetings of the five intellectual property offices of China, the United States, Europe, Japan and South Korea, and jointly hold related activities for the 40th anniversary of cooperation between the China-EU Intellectual Property Offices. (National Intellectual Property Administration)105. Actively participate in discussions on relevant issues under multilateral platforms such as the WTO and APEC, deepen bilateral exchanges and cooperation on intellectual property rights with trading partners such as the EU, Japan, Russia, and Switzerland in the economic and trade fields, and actively promote negotiations on intellectual property rights issues in free trade agreements and the entry into force of the second batch of product lists of the China-EU Geographical Indications Agreement. (Ministry of Commerce, Central Propaganda Department, and National Intellectual Property Administration are responsible)106. Promote the deepening and implementation of the “Belt and Road” intellectual property cooperation, and implement the results of the third “Belt and Road” intellectual property high-level meeting. Hold the 2025 China-ASEAN Intellectual Property Office Directors’ Meeting, promote the improvement of the BRICS intellectual property cooperation mechanism, and support the holding of the second China-Central Asia Intellectual Property Office Directors’ Meeting. (National Intellectual Property Administration, Central Propaganda Department, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs are responsible)107. Promote substantive consultations on international treaties such as the Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations and the Treaty on the Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions. Do a good job in the implementation of key international copyright treaties such as the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances and the Marrakesh Treaty. (Central Propaganda Department and State Administration of Radio, Film and Television are responsible according to their respective duties)108. Seriously implement the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, deepen multilateral and bilateral technical exchanges and cooperation, and participate in the formulation of relevant international standards. (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the National Forestry and Grassland Administration are responsible for their respective duties)109. Relying on the multilateral and bilateral law enforcement cooperation mechanism, strengthen communication and cooperation with foreign law enforcement departments around key transnational infringement and counterfeiting criminal cases. Give full play to the main channel role of Interpol and actively participate in joint law enforcement actions organized by it. (The Ministry of Public Security is responsible)110. Actively participate in international intellectual property affairs under multilateral frameworks such as the World Customs Organization, and promote the establishment of multilateral and regional cooperation mechanisms. (The General Administration of Customs is responsible)111. Strengthen the construction of overseas intellectual property information service platforms, release early warning information in a timely manner, provide services to enterprises in key areas and key links, and do a good job in risk investigation and rights protection guidance. (The Central Propaganda Department, the Ministry of Commerce, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade are responsible for their respective duties)112. Carry out the establishment of training projects in the field of intellectual property and promote human resources development cooperation in the field of intellectual property. (The Central Propaganda Department, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the National International Development Cooperation Agency are responsible for their respective duties)113. Prepare for the 2025 Global Business Rule of Law Conference and strengthen exchanges and cooperation with non-governmental international intellectual property organizations. (China Council for the Promotion of International Trade is responsible)
VII. Strengthen organizational guarantees114. Carry out a five-year summary and evaluation of the Outline and the Plan, strengthen statistical monitoring of indicator data, and supervise and inspect the implementation of work tasks. (Joint Conference Office and member units of the Joint Conference are responsible)115. Collect and promote the fourth batch of typical cases for the construction of a strong intellectual property country. (Joint Conference Office is responsible)116. Give full play to the role of the Expert Advisory Committee for the Construction of a Strong Intellectual Property Country and the National Intellectual Property Strategy Implementation Research Base, and strengthen policy consultation and research support. (Joint Conference Office is responsible)117. Implement tax and fee support policies to support scientific and technological innovation and encourage enterprises to increase their own investment in scientific and technological innovation. (The Ministry of Finance and the State Administration of Taxation are responsible according to their respective duties)118. Prepare and publish the annual development report on the construction of a strong intellectual property country. (Joint Conference Office is responsible)In the above-mentioned division of labor, if multiple departments are responsible, the department listed first is the leading department, and the others are participating departments.