French Crocodile Shake Hands with Zhejiang Crocodile

Recently, French LACOSTE Corporation, the owner of the famous Crocodile Brand, reached an agreement with Zhejiang Crocodile Clothing Company and ended their five-year brand dispute in peace.
　　As reported by Economy Daily, French Crocodile withdrew its lawsuit against Zhejiang Crocodile after the latter acknowledged LACOSTE's exclusive right to use the crocodile figure brand and promised to stop using the Zhejiang Crocodile brand in certain time.
　　In May 2000, French Crocodile brought a lawsuit to the Supreme Court of Beijing for compensation of trademark infringement with the charge that the crocodile figure used on clothing made by Zhejiang Crocodile company is similar to its registered crocodile brand and which may cause confusion or mistakes of customers.
　　In the following five-year suit, Zhejiang Crocodile came to recognize LASCOTE's registered trademark and realized importance of safeguarding legal authority and of respecting prior rights including brand. LASCOTE also showed understanding of a state-owned enterprise’ need and hardship to develop its own brand. So that agreement was reached on the basis of mutual respect and open communication.
        In the peace concord, French Crocodile allowed Zhejiang Crocodile enough transition time to smoothly reform and change its brand.

Patent Suit Rise Again between Korea and Japan

Sumsung SDI Accuse Panasonic of Infringement

Korean Sumsung SDI Company, the world's largest manufacturer of flat panel display, stated on Wednesday that it had filed a suit against Japan's   Matsushita Electronic Corporation and its Panasonic Product Department, accusing them of having infringed patent right of its plasma display panel technology. According to SDI, corresponding negotiation is underway.
        In late February this year, Sumsung SDI filed a similar lawsuit in L.A.USA against FUJITSU of Japan. In June, Sumsung SDI and Japan's FUJITSU reached an agreement to share patents of technologies relative to plasma display panel and to permit each other's patents of plasma technology in five years.
        In April, FUJITSU Company also sued in L.A. three branch companies of Sumsung Group, and sued Sumsung Japan Company in Tokyo local court. FUJITSU Company requested that Japanese court prohibit temporarily the import and sell of the products of Sumsung SDI. In late April, the customs of Tokyo accepted requests of FUJITSU Company and suspended the import of the plasma display panel of SDI.

December 8, 2005                                               Source: www.tech.163.com

Tianjin's Measures for the Protection and Administration of Patents Put in Force on January 1, 2006

Tianjin's Measures for Protection and Administration of Patents has been passed by municipal government and will be put in force from January 1, 2006. It is said that many practical measures have been adopted to encourage invention and technological innovation.

    　Tianjin City encourages enterprises, institutions and other organizations to increase investment in research and development of patent technology and related products. Researching cost is counted into the products’ total cost and enjoys preferential policy for corresponding tax, according to national and local provisions. The cost of buying patents can also be listed in the total cost of an enterprise according to relative provisions.

    　Tianjin City sets up a special fund for patent application, which aims to encourage enterprises and institutions as well as individuals to apply for patents.

   　 To apply for financial support from the Government for projects on scientific research and development, technological innovation and introduction, industrialization of advanced technology, etc. applicants must submit searching report of patent documents of relative technology to corresponding administrative departments.

Entities having been granted patent rights should award prize or remuneration to the inventors or designers for their invention or creation. The amount, time and mode of prize or remuneration are determined by parties concerned or according to provisions. The provisions are as follows: Within three months from the date of granting the patent right, prize or remuneration should be awarded to the inventor or designer, which should not be less than the minimum amount prescribed in laws and regulations. After the patent is applied for and makes profit, the entity should draw each year from any increase in profits after taxation a percentage of no less than 5% due to the exploitation of the patent for invention or utility model, or a percentage of no less than 1% due to the exploitation of the patent for design, and award it to the inventor or designer as remuneration. The entity may, otherwise, by making reference to the above said percentage, award a lump sum of money to the inventor or designer as remuneration. When a patent technology is assigned to others or other entities or individuals are authorized to exploit the patent, the entity shall, within three months from the date of benefiting from the assignment or authorization, after taxation, draw a percentage of no less than 30% from the fee which is charged from the license of exploitation of this patent and award it to the inventor or designer as remuneration.

December 8, 2005                         Source: www.xinhuanet.com

Walmart Cola Belongs to Walmart Supermarket?

Recently, a TV advertisement of Walmart Cola has caught attention of consumers. However, in Walmart Supermarket of Beijing, one cann’t find the product.

It is told that Walmart Cola has no relation with Walmart Supermarket. The manufacturer of Walmart Cola is Henan JiYuan Walmart Company, which registered its trademark of 32 categories on November 14, 2000. In 2002, Walmart Chain Store USA has also applied for the trademark of 45 categories in China. Some specialist said that the business activity of Henan Walmart is legal, and the prior right of the trademark holder should not be violated by Walmart USA although the latter is rather famous.

Ten Top IP Cases in 2005 Disclosed

Today, the Supreme People's Court of Beijing disclosed ten top IP cases in 2005. As they were introduced, all the ten cases related to IP pirating, counterfeiting etc. which violated legal rights and interests of right-holders and seriously disturbed market economic order. Types of the cases cover all kinds of rights of IP and of which there are several influential cases involving foreigners. The right-holders are protected and compensated through juridical procedures. And most of the cases are typical, having great social influences.

The ten top IP cases are:

1. Glass-Metal thermal-sealing Process invention patent infringement disputed case

2.Sursen Electronic Library infringement disputed case

3.Unfair competition disputed case of violating the commercial secret of Yidege Prepared Chinese Ink

4.Disputed case of violating the copyright of TOEFL test questions

5.LiYaFangZhou Sticker Camera System V9.9 software infringement disputed case

6.Montagut trademark infringement disputed case

7.HongShi trademark infringement disputed case

8.Gentongping Keli unfair competition disputed case

9.Sham Dunhill trademark infringement disputed case

10.Disputed case of violating the copyright of Founder Lanting Font