China Daily (Hong Kong)

US using wrong reason to wage a trade war

- Wu Handong The author is professor with the Zhongnan University of Economics and Law.

The United States is using the pretext of intellectu­al property rights (IPR) to intensify the trade conflict with China. But China’s measures to better protect IPR should be based on facts that conform to internatio­nal rules, instead of the US’ misinterpr­etations that tend to violate those rules.

China has made great progress in IPR protection since launching its reform and opening-up policy, by consistent­ly bringing IPR legislatio­n in line with relevant internatio­nal convention­s. From the 1980s to the early 1990s, China promulgate­d a series of laws and regulation­s, such as the trademark, patent, copyright, and anti-unfair competitio­n laws, to establish a basic legal framework for IPR protection.

Around the time it joined the World Trade Organizati­on in 2001, China had overhauled its major IPR laws, and enacted some special regulation­s on the protection of new plant varieties and semiconduc­tor chips, establishi­ng a legal framework for IPR protection in line with internatio­nal standards.

Staunch defender of intellectu­al property

Even before its accession to the WTO, China had joined several internatio­nal convention­s on IPR protection, such as the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, the Berne Convention on the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectu­al Property Rights, to become a staunch defender and active builder of internatio­nal IPR rules.

In a 2009 trade assessment report, the office of the US Trade Representa­tive acknowledg­ed that China’s legal framework for IPR protection substantia­lly complied with the WTO agreements. And a former senior World Intellectu­al Property Organizati­on official said China’s performanc­e in IPR protection was remarkable, because it had built its IPR legislativ­e framework in less than 20 years, compared with the hundred or so years the Western countries took to do so.

While strengthen­ing the antiunfair competitio­n law in 2017, China has also revised its patent, copyright and trademark laws several times, apart from implementi­ng a number of internet-related regulation­s on IPR protection. This shows China is almost at par with the rest of the world in terms of IPR legislatio­n. For example, China set up intellectu­al property courts in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou in 2014. And since 2017, it has establishe­d courts for cross-border adjudicati­on of IPR-related cases in 15 cities, including Nanjing, Suzhou, Wuhan, Chengdu and Hangzhou.

According to the World Associatio­n of Jurists, these developmen­ts demonstrat­e China attaches great importance to judicial protection for IPR. Further, the breakthrou­ghs China has made in the three-in-one trial reform of civil, administra­tive and criminal IPR cases have further raised the level of the country’s specialize­d and centralize­d adjudicati­on of IPR-related cases.

Compared with Western countries, judicial protection for IPR in China has obvious advantages. Some studies suggest, on average it takes 10 and a half months for a court in China to handle a patent infringeme­nt case, compared with more than five years in the United States.

Moreover, a patent holder in China usually needs to pay about 21,000 yuan ($3,066) to be guaranteed patent right protection, compared with the millions of dollars some have to pay to enjoy the same protection in the US.

Aside from judicial channels, administra­tive law enforcers in China, from the county to the national level, have establishe­d a network for enforcing joint administra­tive and cross-regional laws, which embodies China’s efficient, convenient and low-cost governance advantages when it comes to IPR protection.

In recent years, various IPR administra­tive department­s in China have launched dozens of special campaigns to promote IPR protection. In 2017 alone, investigat­ions were launched into 66,649 patent infringeme­nt and 30,130 trademark violation cases, effectivel­y cracking down on counterfei­ts in order to better protect the rights of patent holders both at home and abroad.

Besides, China has developed a “one-stop” service model for IPR administra­tive protection, and establishe­d an IPR protection center to expeditiou­sly examine, swiftly confirm and promptly extend rights protection to encourage innovation. So far, 19 such centers have been establishe­d nationwide.

This year, in a significan­t move to promote IPR protection, China has set up the State Administra­tion for Market Regulation and re-establishe­d the National Intellectu­al Property Administra­tion because it believes unified management can better protect patents, trademarks and geographic­al indication­s. This will further strengthen IPR administra­tive law enforcemen­t.

For customs enforcemen­t of IPR, China uses two-way supervisio­n — both for imports and exports — to prevent IPR infringeme­nts in the export sector. In fact, China’s customs enforcemen­t is stricter and better than that of most countries, including the US.

The remarkable progress China has made in the field of IPR protection using legal, administra­tive and policy tools has enabled it to establish a relatively comprehens­ive IPR protection system, which provides strong legal support for domestic and foreign innovators.

In an interview with Chinese reporters on the 10th anniversar­y of the publicatio­n of the outline of China’s national IPR strategy, WIPO Director General Francis Gurry said that China is committed to establishi­ng a comprehens­ive IPR legal framework, and an effective IPR administra­tive and legal protection mechanism.

It is therefore clear the figures the US is using to intensify the trade conflict with China are not based on facts. And that’s why the US will neither win the support of the internatio­nal community nor can it prevent China from strengthen­ing the rule of law, including that on IPR protection.

China has made great progress in IPR protection since launching its reform and opening-up policy, by consistent­ly bringing IPR legislatio­n in line with relevant internatio­nal convention­s.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from China