2010年，江苏法院紧紧围绕科学发展主题和加快转变经济发展方式主线，全面加强审判工作，深入推进社会矛盾化解、社会管理创新、公正廉洁执法三项重点工作，积极实施国家和省知识产权战略纲要，知识产权司法保护工作取得了新的进展，为创新型国家和创新型省份建设提供了坚强有力的司法保障。

　　一、依法服务经济社会发展大局，深入贯彻实施国家和省知识产权战略

　　全省法院始终坚持能动司法，积极应对后金融危机时期的各方面变化，依法调处知识产权纠纷，促进加快经济发展方式转变，维护市场竞争秩序，为经济社会发展提供有力司法保障和良好法律服务。

　　一是及时制定规范性意见，服务经济发展方式转变。省法院先后出台《关于为我省加快转变经济发展方式提供司法保障的意见》、《关于为促进我省中小民营企业健康发展提供司法保障的意见》等规范性文件，其中专门就服务创新型经济建设、增强企业市场核心竞争力及风险防范能力等知识产权问题提出指导意见。各地法院结合本地实际，充分发挥司法保障与引导作用，先后出台了激励企业自主创新，促进产业转型升级的具体司法举措，形成了一批地方性调研报告和规范性文件。如南京中院围绕青奥会承办工作，出台《关于2014年第二届夏季青年奥运会知识产权司法保护工作的意见》。

　　二是重点扶持核心技术和新兴产业，促进地方特色产业发展。一方面，各地法院结合国家、省发展战略和产业政策，重点加大对经济增长有重大突破性带动作用、具有自主知识产权的关键核心技术的保护力度，促进战略性新兴产业成为可持续发展的主导力量，促进自主品牌的形成和发展，促进新商业模式的发展和文化创意产业的繁荣。省法院与连云港中院等法院密切配合，深入了解医药产业当前存在的知识产权问题，及时提供对策建议，积极扶持国内大型医药企业健康发展。无锡中院组成物联网知识产权保护调研课题组，走访无锡国家物联网创新示范区多家企业、科研机构和相关政府部门，对物联网产业知识产权保护情况进行全面分析，形成物联网产业知识产权保护司法建议。

　　另一方面，各地法院围绕当地经济发展战略和特色产业，确定服务大局的具体工作目标，有效延伸司法审判职能。南通法院积极推动“南通家纺市场”由单一的版权保护模式向版权、商标权、外观设计专利权相结合的综合立体保护模式发展，“南通家纺市场” 版权保护经验受到联合国世界知识产权组织的高度评价，人民日报、中央电视台、中央人民广播电台等9家中央媒体对此进行了专门采访和调研；扬州法院在该市设立知识产权巡回法庭，打造审批服务、延伸服务、交流服务三个平台。连云港法院深入东海县水晶市场，就知识产权保护情况进行专项调研，编写了《东海水晶市场知识产权知识百问百答》宣传手册。无锡法院加强紫砂工艺知识产权保护，出台《关于加强紫砂行业知识产权保护的司法建议》，在法院协助推动下，宜兴地区拥有紫砂方面的专利已超过2000件。

　　三是深入联系企业，积极开展法律培训和风险提示工作。各地法院密切关注各类产业中可能存在的知识产权风险，深入医药、新材料、电信、物联网、网吧、白酒等产业聚集地和矛盾纠纷多发领域进行调研，一方面通过走访企业、集中开展座谈、举办义务法律讲座、法官定点联系企业等多种形式，深入了解企业知识产权司法保护需求，有针对性地开展知识产权法律服务和培训工作。另一方面完善企业知识产权信息发布制度，并及时向党委、政府相关部门和相关企业发出司法建议，为党委、政府决策提供参考，帮助企业完善内部治理机制，防范经营风险。

　　二、依法公正高效审理案件，充分发挥司法保护知识产权的主导作用

　　（一）充分发挥有效遏制侵权行为和定分止争功能，激励自主创新，依法妥善审理知识产权民事案件

　　2010年，全省法院共审理知识产权民事案件4466件（一审案件4201件、二审案件265件）。其中，新收案件4079件（一审案件3852件、二审案件227件），一审新收案件数同比增长53.6%；新收一审著作权纠纷案件1753件，占新收案件总数的49.7%；商标权纠纷案件938件，占37.1%；专利权纠纷案件431件，占12.2%；知识产权合同类案件119件，占3.4%；不正当竞争案件72件，占2.0%；其他类型知识产权案件211件。2010年，全省知识产权民事案件呈现以下特点：1、著作权、商标权纠纷案件增幅明显。新收一审著作权、商标权纠纷案件数量同比分别增长78.3%和67.2%。2、关联案件比例较大。共新收一审关联案件共计419起2688件，占一审收案总数的69.8%，关联案件主要集中于电影作品网络传播权、音乐及图片作品著作权、商标权等与社会经济文化生活关系较为密切的领域。关联案件中，著作权纠纷1519件，占全部关联案件的56.5%；商标权纠纷779件，占29.0%；专利权纠纷357件，占13.3%。3、涉外知识产权案件数持续增加。共新收一审涉外知识产权案件127件，同比增加33件，所涉国家包括美国、德国、法国、芬兰、荷兰、加拿大、英国、瑞士等，涉外关联案件也相应有所增长。4、新类型案件不断产生。南京中院审结了全国首例侵犯集成电路布图设计纠纷，无锡中院受理了全省首起反垄断纠纷。

　　全省法院牢固树立以执法办案为第一要务的理念，加大知识产权侵权惩处力度，降低维权成本，提高侵权代价，遏制侵权行为，有效促进自主创新，维护公平有序的市场竞争环境。全年共审结一、二审知识产权民事案件3964件（一审案件3748件、二审案件216件），结案数同比增长45.8%。其中，判决715件，判决率16.7％，同比下降9.5个百分点。审结了一批社会关注度高，社会影响面广的重大案件，如上海天络行文化传播有限公司与常州市公园乐购生活购物有限公司之间涉及《喜洋洋与灰太狼》作品的文化衍生产业著作权纠纷案、美国安氏企业公司与无锡市海克钨制品有限公司之间涉及产品标识在获得商标注册之前的著作权纠纷案等。省法院审结的里下河地区农科所诉天补农资公司侵犯植物新品种权纠纷案、新海宜电信发展股份有限公司诉南京普天通信股份有限公司侵犯专利权纠纷案被2010年《最高人民法院公报》刊用。

　　全省法院在案件审理中，一是不断探索总结疑难复杂案件审判经验。编写《侵犯专利权纠纷案件审理指南》、《侵犯商业秘密案件审理指南》等类案审理意见，有效统一了审理思路，提高了审判水平。二是积极参与最高法院相关司法解释起草的研讨工作。形成《江苏法院网络著作权纠纷案件调研报告》等一批调研成果，为相关司法解释出台作出积极贡献。三是进一步完善关联案件协调机制。继续加强关联案件的及时上报工作，坚持各中院庭长例会制度，根据各地经济发展水平，探索建立既相对统一又存在合理区别的关联案件裁判标准。全年对近400起关联案件进行沟通协调，有效统一执法尺度。四是加强统筹指导，涉诉矛盾纠纷化解工作成效显著。进一步健全具有知识产权特色的诉调对接机制，充分发挥行业协会在调解中的积极作用。2010年，以调解方式结案747件，经调解撤诉案件2422件，调解、撤诉案件两项合计3169件，调撤率为79.9％，同比上升9.1个百分点，且绝大部分调解撤诉案件得以自觉履行，有效实现了案结事了，切实维护了社会和谐稳定。

　　（二）充分发挥刑事审判惩治和预防犯罪功能，依法从严打击各类知识产权违法犯罪行为

　　2010年，全省法院共新收“三审合一”试点刑事案件69件，同比增长了2.6倍；审结64件，同比增长了2.6倍。全省法院进一步加大知识产权刑事司法保护力度，充分发挥知识产权司法保护资源整合的优势，依法从严打击各类知识产权犯罪活动。一是积极实施国务院打击侵犯知识产权和制售假冒伪劣商品专项行动，及时制定专项行动方案，全面开展专项行动。各地法院与当地公安、检察等部门紧密协作，开展大要案督办，对知识产权刑事案件快审快结，依法从严打击各类知识产权犯罪活动，审结了南京“5·26”销售盗版和淫秽光盘案等一批具有较大影响的典型案件，王佳豪侵犯著作权案入选为全国法院专项行动典型案例。二是坚持大案要案督办制度，继续加强与行政执法部门之间的工作协调，不断增强刑事司法保护的综合效能。三是坚持宽严相济的刑事政策，推进量刑规范化改革，切实保护被害人的合法权益。灵活运用各种刑事制裁措施，充分发挥刑罚惩治和预防知识产权犯罪的功能。

　　（三）充分发挥监督和支持知识产权行政执法的职能，依法履行对知识产权行政行为的司法审查职责

　　2010年，全省法院共新收“三审合一”试点行政案件8件，审结8件，其中常熟市聚满仓食品有限公司不服行政处罚纠纷案入选为2010年全省知识产权司法保护十大案例。全省法院依法履行对行政行为的司法审查职责，切实发挥监督和支持知识产权依法行政的审判职能。一是依法促进行政执法规范化建设。依法审理各类知识产权行政案件，积极支持行政机关依法行政，纠正各类违法行政行为，依法促进行政执法规范化。二是积极参与知识产权社会管理创新。对于案件审理中发现的各类问题及时向相关行政机关发送司法建议；与工商、版权、专利等知识产权行政管理部门联合召开座谈会；积极参与相关行政管理部门组织的业务培训，协助行政机关完善各项制度措施，提高知识产权管理水平。三是构建支持和监督行政机关依法行政的长效机制。继续强化源头预防和化解知识产权行政争议的有效机制，推动涉诉行政争议综合调处机制试点工作取得新进展，进一步搭建和完善了与行政执法机关沟通协作的长期平台。

　　三、深化司法改革，完善知识产权审判体系建设

　　一是深入推进知识产权“三审合一”改革试点工作。各地法院审理知识产权刑事、行政案件能力不断提升，对相关问题的认识进一步深化，为下一步推进试点工作打下了坚实基础。国务院打击侵犯知识产权和制售假冒伪劣商品专项行动开展以来，各地法院积极参加专项行动，并以此为契机，有效推动“三审合一”改革试点工作取得新进展，促进知识产权刑事案件审判水平的进一步提高。

　　省法院及时对“三审合一”改革试点工作开展情况进行全面梳理总结，收集整理改革试点工作中存在的各类问题，就不同司法程序之间的衔接、技术鉴定、证据认定、量刑标准等疑难复杂问题，加强与省公安厅、省检察院等单位的沟通协调，采取联合召开座谈会、上门走访等多种形式，充分征求各方面意见，推动各方面就相关问题达成共识，推进试点工作深入开展。

　　二是构建全省法院知识产权审判“技术专家库”，切实解决技术事实认定难问题。在省法院指导下，2010年各地法院普遍建立了技术专家库。在此基础上，省法院出台《知识产权审判技术专家的管理办法（试行）》，建立全省技术专家库，将全省法院157名知识产权审判技术专家纳入专家库统一管理使用，专家库成员包括化工、物理、机械、计算机、电子通信、生物、医药、农业等各领域专家学者和技术人员，同时明确技术专家的选任、回避、职责、参加案件审理方式、专家咨询意见的采信标准和程序、法律培训等各方面问题。目前，部分技术专家已开始正式参与知识产权案件审理工作，省法院及各地法院也多次组织技术专家旁听观摩公开庭审、参加各类知识产权法律业务培训。从审理情况看，技术专家直接参与案件审理，对于及时准确地厘清技术问题，提高审判质效起到很好的帮助作用，改革工作取得了阶段性成果。

　　三是进一步合理配置知识产权审判资源。在坚持适度集中管辖的同时，根据全省经济社会发展需要，合理配置司法资源，适时增加管辖法院。2010年，经报请最高人民法院批准，增加指定昆山市人民法院管辖实用新型、外观设计专利纠纷案件，张家港市人民法院管辖部分知识产权纠纷案件。目前全省已有7个中院具有专利案件管辖权，1个基层法院具有审理部分专利案件管辖权，17个基层法院具有部分知识产权民事案件管辖权，知识产权法官约160余人，总量位居全国前列。2010年，全省基层法院新收知识产权案件数1178件，审结1138件，分别占全省法院一审新收和审结案件总数的30.6%和30.4%，在全省知识产权审判工作中所起的作用日益显著。

　　四、深入推进司法公开，积极营造和谐健康的司法环境

　　一是精心筹划江苏知识产权专业化审判十五周年系列活动。2010年上半年，省法院成功举办了江苏知识产权专业化审判十五周年纪念大会暨知识产权保护与利益平衡研讨会，出版《创新与发展-江苏法院知识产权审判十五年成果集》、《辉煌的历程 美好的未来纪念画册》，向社会公众集中展示十五年来江苏法院在知识产权审判、调研、改革、队伍建设、基层建设等方面的发展历程与良好业绩，表彰了一批知识产权审判工作先进集体和先进个人。省政府领导、最高法院知识产权庭领导、国内知名专家学者、部分兄弟法院代表、全省法院审判条线代表等参加了本次活动，并就当前形势下知识产权司法保护政策、知识产权诉讼中不侵权抗辩、知识产权权利冲突、不正当竞争及知识产权合同法律问题研究等四个专题进行了广泛、深入的探讨交流，《法制日报》、《人民法院报》、《新华日报》等主流媒体进行了专门报道，进一步提升了江苏法院知识产权审判工作在全国的影响力。

　　二是发布知识产权司法保护蓝皮书，积极开展“世界知识产权日”宣传周活动。公开发布《2009年江苏法院知识产权司法保护状况》（江苏法院知识产权司法保护蓝皮书），介绍2009年全省法院知识产权司法保护工作状况、全省知识产权司法保护十大典型案件、江苏省企业知识产权保护状况分析以及司法保护大事记等。其中，上海三联（集团）有限公司、上海三联（集团）有限公司吴良材眼镜公司诉苏州市吴良材眼镜有限责任公司等侵犯注册商标专用权及不正当竞争纠案、成都共软网络科技有限公司与孙显忠、洪磊等侵犯著作权犯罪案（即“番茄花园”软件盗版案）2篇案例入选为最高人民法院2009年中国法院知识产权司法保护10大案件，另有3篇案例入选最高人民法院2009年中国法院知识产权司法保护50件典型案例，总量位居全国法院前列。全省法院积极开展“世界知识产权日”法制宣传活动。通过邀请人大代表和政协委员等代表性人士旁听案件审判并征求意见、公开宣判一批具有较大社会影响的知识产权案件等方式，不断加强对知识产权司法保护工作的宣传。

　　三是进一步落实审判公开和裁判文书公开。始终坚持增强审判工作透明度，落实审判公开制度。继续坚持知识产权一、二审案件全部开庭审理，积极为当事人提供诉讼引导、风险告知、法律咨询、司法救助等各项法律服务。2010年，全省法院继续坚持上网公布审结生效的所有知识产权裁判文书，全年共上网知识产权裁判文书560篇，截至目前共上网裁判文书 4461篇，数量位居全国前列。

　　2011年是“十二五”规划的开局之年，也是加快转变经济发展方式和调整经济结构的关键之年，知识产权审判工作机遇与挑战并存。全省法院将积极实施创新驱动核心战略，以执法办案为中心，坚持能动司法，深入推进三项重点工作，积极拓展服务大局新领域，充分发挥知识产权在促进经济发展方式转变方面的独特作用，全面提高审判工作水平，为知识产权事业的不断发展作出新的贡献。

Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Jiangsu Courts in 2010

Special Remarks:
This paper is published in both Chinese and English. The Chinese version shall prevail in case of any ambiguity.

In 2010, by adhering to the scientific development and accelerating the transformation of economic development, courts at all levels in Jiangsu Province have strengthened the trial, deeply promoted the Three Important Tasks including social disputes resolution, social management innovation and impartial law application, and actively implemented the Outline of the National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Strategy. Remarkable progress has been made in IPR protection, which provided strong judicial safeguards for constructing an “Innovation-Based Nation” and an “Innovation-Based Province”.

I. Legally serving the social and economic development, and actively implementing the National and Provincial Intellectual Property Strategy

All courts in entire province have stuck to the principle of active judiciary, energetically dealt with various changes in post-financial-crisis era, resolved IPR disputes by mediation according to the law, promoted to accelerate the transformation of economic development, maintained the order of market competition, and provided strong judicial safeguards and perfect legal service.

1. Formulating normative regulations and serving the transformation of economic development

The High People’s Court of Jiangsu Province worked out a series of regulatory documents including the Guidelines on Providing Judicial Safeguards for Accelerating the Transformation of the Economic Development in Jiangsu, the Guidelines on Providing Judicial Safeguards for Promoting the Healthy Growth of Medium and Small Sized Private Enterprises, etc, which provide guidelines for severing innovative economic developing and strengthening core competitiveness against risks of enterprises. In accordance with their own legal practice, local courts fully played the role of judicial safeguard and guidance, took specific judicial measures to encourage enterprises to self-innovate and boost industrial upgrading and transformation, and worked out a series of research reports and normative documents. For example, Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court laid down the Guidelines of Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights for the 2nd Summer Youth Olympic Game in 2014.

2. Supporting the core technology and emerging industry, and promoting the development of local industries with their own characteristic

According to the State and provincial development strategy and industrial policies, all courts focused on intensifying the protection of core technologies with proprietary IPR and significant breakthroughs in boosting economic increase, made emerging strategic industries turn into the main force of sustainable development, facilitated the creation and development of the brands, and promoted the development of new business model and the prosperity of cultural and creative industry. Cooperating with other courts like Lianyungang Intermediate People’s Court, the High People’s Court of Jiangsu Province made research into problems on IPR in pharmaceutical industry, and then timely gave suggestive solutions and support to local large-scaled enterprises for their healthy development. Wuxi Intermediate People’s Court established a research group for the purpose of studying IPR protection of the Internet of Thing. The group has visited a host of enterprises, scientific research institutions and relative government branches in Wuxi. Then it comprehensively analyzed the IPR protection situations of Internet of Things, and put forward legal suggestions on judicial IPR protection for the formation of Internet of Things industry.

In addition, on the basis of local economic development strategy and characteristic industries, all courts worked out specific objectives to contribute to the overall social and economic development, and effectively extended the coverage of judicial function. The courts in Nantong City actively promoted the development of Nantong Home Textiles Market to change its single protective model of copyright into the integrative three-dimensional model including copyright, trademark right and industrial design right protection. The copyright protection experience of Nantong Home Textile Market received high praise from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); what’s more, 9 Chinese central news agencies including People’s Daily, China Central Television and China National Radio focused on the case by various means like special interviews and research. Yangzhou Intermediate People’s Court  set up a circuit IPR court, thus established the three-service-platform including trial, extensional function of trial and communication. Lianyungang Intermediate People’s Court carried out research on IPR protection of the crystal market in Donghai County, and compiled a booklet named 100 Q& As on IPR Knowledge of Donghai Crystal Market. The courts in Wuxi have strengthened the IPR protection of the Zisha teapot manufacturing technique, and provided Judicial Advices on IPR protection of Zisha Industry. Up till now, there have been over 2000 patents about Zisha in Yixing County.

3. Closely contacting with enterprises to carry out training on law issues and the early risk warning

All courts have paid close attention to potential IPR risks in different industries, and made thorough research in the fields of pharmaceutical, new material, telecommunication, internet bars, liquor where conflicts are more likely to happen. By visiting enterprises, holding symposiums, and offering voluntary lectures on law issues, the courts have well understood enterprises’ demands for IPR protection. According to the research, the courts carried out relevant service and trainings on law issues. In addition, the courts perfected the information release system, timely provided judicial suggestion to relevant committees of the Communist Party, government agencies and enterprises, which would be the valuable decision-making reference for CPC committees and government; at the same time, these information  greatly facilitated the companies to perfect their internal management system and prevent risks during operation.

II. Trying IPR Cases Efficiently and fairly according to Law, and playing the leading role in IPR Protection

1. Fulfilling the functions of preventing IPR infringement and resolving relevant disputes, encouraging self innovation by dealing with civil cases according to law

In 2010, courts at all levels in Jiangsu Province tried 4, 466 IPR civil cases including 4, 201 first instance cases and 265 second instance cases. The newly accepted cases were 4, 079 ( 3, 852 first instance cases and 227 second instance cases), with a year-on-year 53.6% increase compared with 2009; there were 1,753 copyright cases, accounting for 49.7% of the total; 938 trademark cases, 37.1%; 431 patent cases, 12.2%; 119 technology contract cases, 3.4%; 72 anti-unfair competition cases, 2.0%; and 211 on other IPR cases.

In 2010, the IPR cases showed the following characters: ⑴The number of copyright and trademark right cases increased remarkably. Among the newly accepted cases, copyright and trademark cases saw a year-on-year increase of 78.3% and 67.2% respectively. ⑵There were a high percentage of relevant cases with the same plaintiffs or defendants. In total, 2688 first instance cases of this nature were accepted by all courts which accounted for 69.8% among all cases. Most of them were related to online transmission right of cinematographic works, copyright of music and picture works, trademark rights and others closely linked to social economic and cultural life. Of all the relevant cases, there were 1519 on copyright, accounting for 56.5%; 779 on trademark, 29.0%; 357 on patent, 13.3%. ⑶The IPR cases with foreign elements kept increasing. Of all newly accepted cases of the first instance, there were 127 cases related to foreign IPR with an increase of 33 from 2009. These cases were related to several countries like USA, Germany, France, Finland, Canada, Britain, Switzerland etc. The relevant cases related to foreign IPR increased correspondingly. ⑷The new types of IPR civil cases were emerging constantly. Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court tried the first case of infringement of layout-design of integrated circuits in China. Wuxi Intermediate People’s Court accepted the first antimonopoly case in Jiangsu Province.

All courts in Jiangsu Province have firmly established the principle that law application should be the top priority. In order to effectively promote proprietary innovation and maintain the fair and orderly competition, courts at all levels tightened punishment for IPR infringement, reduced cost of safeguarding rights, and increased the price for infringement. As a result, infringement acts were effectively prevented. In the entire year, all courts had finished 3, 964 IPR civil cases including 3, 748 first instance cases and 216 second instance cases, a year-on-year 45.8% increase. There were 715 cases finished by issuing formal judgments, whose rate reached 16.7%, a year-on-year 9.5% reduction. The courts finished a few of widely influential and highly concerned cases such as, in extension sector of cultural industry, the copyright case related to the film named Pleasant Goat and Big Big Wolf betwwen Shanghai Skynet Asia Cultural Communication Co., Ltd. vs. Changzhou Gongyuan Tesco Life Shopping Co., Ltd.; and the copyright case related to the use of product trademark in unregistered period between American An’s Corporation vs. Wuxi HiCoo Tungsten Caibide Co., Ltd. Additionally, two cases finished by the High People’s Court of Jiangsu Province were published in 2010 Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China, including the case LX-river Area Institute of Agricultural Sciences vs. Tianbu Agricultural Materials Company for infringement of new plant variety right and Suzhou New Sea Union Telecom Technology Co., Ltd. corporation vs. Nanjing Putian Telecommunications Co., Ltd. for infringement of patent right.

During the trial, all courts in Jiangsu also took the following positive measures. Firstly, they kept exploring and summarizing the experience of trying difficult and complicated cases. The Judicial Guidebook of handling Patent Infringement Cases and The Judicial Guidebook of Trade Secret Infringement Case were compiled to provide standard opinions of judgment for judges. Secondly, they actively participated in the judicial interpretations of the Supreme Court. They had a series of research papers including the Report of Research on Network Copyright and contributed to the formulation of the relevant judicial interpretation. Thirdly, the courts further perfected the coordination system of relevant cases. The courts continued to strengthen information reporting system of relevant cases to higher courts, held regular chief judges’ meetings from all intermediate courts in Jiangsu Province, and, according economic development in different areas, tried to form some unified judgment standards with reasonable differences. In 2010, the higher courts coordinated with other courts after well communication on 400 relevant cases and effectively unified the judicial standards. Fourthly, the higher courts intensified the instruction to the lower courts. By this way, great achievements were made in resolving conflicts. The courts perfected the mechanism of combining trial with mediation with distinct IPR characteristic, and further explored the positive functions of industrial associations during mediation. In 2010, there were 747 cases settled by mediation, 2, 422 cases withdrawn because of conciliation, i.e. 79.9% cases were ended through mediation, a year-on-year 9.1% increase. What’s more, most cases of this type were enforced by both parties voluntarily. As a result, the courts effectively finished all the cases without any new disputes, and practically maintained social harmony and stability.
2. Fulfilling the function of punishing and deterring crimes, cracking down IPR infringements according to law

As an experimental move, IPR civil cases, criminal cases, and administrative cases are being tried in one tribunal. 69 IPR criminal cases with civil, criminal and administrative elements were accepted in 2010, a year-on-year 260% increase. Among them, 64 cases were settled, a year-on-year 260% increase. Courts in Jiangsu Province further strengthened IPR protection by criminal means, took advantage of tuning up different resources, and punished all kinds of IPR crimes strictly.

Firstly, according the direction from the State Council, the courts timely made special plans and waged special campaigns to fight against IPR infringement and producing and selling fake and inferior commodities. They closely cooperated with local police and prosecution departments, supervised the settlement of major and main cases, rapidly tried and concluded IPR criminal cases, strictly punished various criminal activities related IPR infringement, and finally several typical and influential cases were settled like 5.26 Selling Pornographic and Pirated Compact Discs Case in Nanjing. The case that Wangjiahao infringed the copyright was adopted as one of the typical cases in the special campaign launched by State Council. Secondly, the courts kept a close eye on the settlement of major and main cases, continued to deepen cooperation with administrative law-enforcement agencies, and constantly enhanced integrated efficiency of criminal judicial protection. Thirdly, the courts persisted in the principle of temper justice with mercy during criminal charge, promoted the reform of normalizing sentencing discretion, practically protected victims’ legitimate interests, flexibly exercised all kinds of criminal penalty measures, and fully performed the criminal penalty function of preventing and punishing crimes.

3. Fulfilling the function of supervising and supporting the law application by administrative agencies to protect IPR, and conducting judicial review on their action according to law

In 2010, there were 8 administrative cases accepted and concluded by courts in the new experimental trial system; among them, the case that Changshu Jumancang Food Co., Ltd. refused to accept administrative punishment was adopted as one of the 10 typical IPR protection cases in Jiangsu in 2010. All courts faithfully performed the function of judicial review on administrative action to supervise and support government agencies to assume their duties by law.

Firstly, the courts promoted the normalization of administrative law-enforcement action. The courts tried various administrative cases related IPR according to law, actively supported administrative branches to execute their power legally, corrected varieties of administrative acts against the law, and advanced the normalization of administrative law-enforcement. Secondly, the courts actively participated in social management innovation related to IPR. They promptly provided judicial advice to related administrative authorities as soon as they found problems during law enforcement, held meetings jointly with the IPR administrative authorities including the Industry and Commerce Bureau, the Copyright Office and the Patent Office, actively participated in business training organized by related administrative authorities, helped them perfect varieties of measures and systems, and increased their IPR management capacity. Thirdly, the courts set up a long-term mechanism to support and supervise administrative authorities execute their administrative power by law. In addition, they continued to reinforce effective system of avoiding and eliminating administrative disputes concerned IPR from beginning. In order to establish a well communication platform with administrative authorities, experimental work had been done to promote the establishment of a comprehensive conciliating system to settle the administrative disputes related to IPR. In this aspect, new progress were achieved.

Ⅲ. Deepening judicial reform and improving judicial system of IPR trial

1. Deeply promoting the judicial reform and the experimental model of combining IPR civil, administrative and criminal trials in one tribunal (“three-in-one”).

All courts constantly enhanced their ability to try IPR criminal and administrative cases, gained insight to the related problems, and built a firm base to promote the experiment in next period. After carrying out the special action, initiated by State Council, of fighting against the IPR-infringements and producing and selling the fake and inferior commodities, all courts actively joined in the special action and regarded it as an opportunity to effectively promote “three-in-one” reform, and further enhanced the IPR criminal trial capability.

The High People’s Court of Jiangsu province timely and fully summarized the status of carrying out “three-in-one” reform, collected and classified all kinds of problems from the reform, then strengthened the communication, discussion and coordination with Jiangsu Public Security Bureau and People’s Procuratorate on some complicated issues such as connection among different judicial procedures, technology authentication, evidence judgment, penalty standard, asked for advice by hosting symposium together and door-to-door visit, promoted all parties to come to an agreement on certain issues, and deeply developed the reform.

2. Constructing the "Technical Expert Library" of Jiangsu province for IPR trial and effectively solving the difficulties of technical-facts identification.

With the guidance of the High People’s Court of Jiangsu Province, “Technical Expert Library” was set up by all courts in Jiangsu Province in 2010. On this basis, Jiangsu Provincial High People’s Court formulated the Administrative Measures of IPR Technical Experts Library (Interim) and established the provincial Technical Expert Library including 157 IPR technical experts which are brought into unified management and use in the whole province. Technical Expert Library comprised experts and technicians in chemical, physical, mechanical, computer, electronic communication, biological medicine, agriculture and other fields. Meanwhile, the regulation provided experts selection, avoidance and their responsibilities, ways of  participating in trial, standards and procedures to adapt their advice, and training experts on law. Currently, some technical experts have begun to formally participate in the trial of IPR cases. Jiangsu High People’s Court and all local courts have organized technical experts to attend and observe public hearings and receive various IPR professional training on law. From the trial practice, technical experts directly involving in cases judgment have played a very good helping role in clarifying the technical problems timely and accurately, and then improved the trial efficiency. As a result, gradual achievement of the reform has been seen.

3. Further rational allocating IPR trial resources

While the principle of moderate concentration of jurisdiction was stuck to, according to the needs of the province’s economic and social development, judicial resources were rationally allocated and the number of district courts for dealing with IPR cases was properly increased. In 2010, after approval by the Supreme People’s Court, Kunshan People’s Court obtained the jurisdiction of handling the utility model and industrial design patent disputes. In the same year, Zhangjiagang People’s Court also obtained the jurisdiction of handling some IPR disputes. At present, there are 7 intermediate courts having the jurisdiction of trying patent cases, 1 district court possessing the jurisdiction of trying some patent cases and 17 district courts possessing jurisdiction of some civil IPR cases. Meanwhile, there are about 160 IPR judges in all courts of Jiangsu Province, the number of which is in the forefront of China. In 2010, all the district courts of Jiangsu province nearly accepted 1178 IPR cases and finished 1138 IPR cases accounting for 30.6% and 30.4% respectively among all newly accepted and finished cases of the first instance in all courts. Obviously, the district courts are playing the prominent role in IPR trial of Jiangsu province.

Ⅳ. Deeply promoting the judicial transparency and actively establishing the harmonious and healthy judicial environment.

1. Carefully planning and conducting the serial activities of 15th anniversary of Jiangsu specialized IPR trial.

In the first half year of 2010, the High People’s Court of Jiangsu Province successfully held the 15th Anniversary of Jiangsu Specialized IPR Trial and the seminar on IPR Protection and IPR Interests Balance. Additionally, the book “Innovation and Development –IPR Trial Achievements of Jiangsu Courts in the Past 15 Years”, and the commemorative album named “Glorious History and Better Future” were published and showed the development and outstanding achievements on Jiangsu IPR trials, research, reform, team building and basic construction of the district courts in the past 15 years. Also, a number of excellent collectives and individuals being engaged in IPR trial were commended. Leaders of the Jiangsu provincial government and the Third Civil tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court, famous experts and scholars, representatives from other high courts and some of IPR judges in Jiangsu courts attended the seminar. Four topics including IPR judicial protection, non-infringement identification, IPR rights conflict, and unfair competition and legal issues of IPR contract were discussed extensively and deeply. Some mainstream media agencies including “Legal Daily”, “People’s Court News”, and “China Daily” reported this seminar specially, which further enhanced the influence of Jiangsu IPR trial in China.

2. Publishing the Blue Book of the Judicial IPR Protection in Jiangsu, and actively carrying out publicity activities in a week around the “World Intellectual Property Day”.

"The Status of Judicial IPR Protection in Jiangsu Courts in 2009" (the Blue Book of the Judicial IPR Protection in Jiangsu) was Published, and introduced the status of judicial IPR protection in Jiangsu courts, the top 10 typical cases of judicial IPR protection, the analysis of IPR protection of enterprises in Jiangsu, and other memorabilia in 2009. Two cases including Shanghai Sanlian (Group) Co., Ltd. and Wuliangcai Glasses Co., Ltd. of Shanghai Sanlian (Group) Co., Ltd. vs. Suzhou Wuliangcai Glasses Co., Ltd. for the infringement of registered trademark and unfair competition, and Chengdu General Soft Network Technology Co., Ltd. vs. Sun Xianzhong and Hong Lei for the copyright criminal (“Tomato Garden” software piracy case) were selected as two of the top 10 cases of judicial IPR protection in 2009 by the Supreme People’s Court of China. Moreover, another three cases were selected as three of the typical 50 cases of judicial IPR protection in 2009 by the Supreme People’s Court of China. The total number of selected cases from Jiangsu courts was in the forefront among all courts in China. Additionally, Jiangsu courts actively carried out the publicity activities on law during the week around the "World Intellectual Property Day". They kept on strengthening the publicity of judicial IPR protection by inviting representative members of NPC and CPPCC to attend hearing and asking for advice, and publicly trying a number of IPR cases with significant social influence.

3. Further implementing the principle of publicly trying and disclosing judgments.

In 2010, the courts of Jiangsu province adhered to intensifying the transparency of judicial activities and implemented the institution of publicly trying. They insisted that all the IPR cases should be tried through hearing, and actively provided the parties with lawsuit guidance, the risk of litigation notification, law consultation, judicial salvage and other legal services. Meanwhile, in 2010, Jiangsu courts insisted on disclosing all effective IPR judgments on the Internet, and a total of 560 IPR judgments were uploaded during this year. Up to the present, a total of 4461 IPR judgments have been disclosed, the number of which was in the forefront among all the courts in China.

The year of 2011 is the first year of the "Twelfth Five Year Plan", also is the key year for accelerating the economic development transformation and adjusting the economy structure. Hence, there will be concurrence of opportunities and challenges to the IPR trial. Jiangsu courts will actively implement the innovation strategy, regard enforcing law and handling cases as the fundamental tasks, stick to the idea of Active judicature, further promote the Three Important Tasks, actively develop new areas of serving the overall situation, exert the unique role of judicial IPR protection in promoting economic development transformation, comprehensively improve trial ability, and make new contributions to the development of intellectual property rights.