Sino-Us Agreement On Intellectual Property Rights
providing sufficient civil and criminal sanctions to deter future theft or intellectual property violations. Who knows, but on January 15, 2020, the United States and China signed phase 1 of the U.S.-China Economic and Trade Agreement (the “Agreement”). The agreement, due to come into force on 14 February 2020, seeks to end, or at least ease, the tensions of trade war between the two economic giants of the world. The agreement deals, among other things, with the protection and enforcement of U.S. intellectual property rights (“IP”) in China. While the agreement does not raise all concerns about the protection and enforcement of U.S. companies in China, it is certainly a step in the right direction. In Chapter 1, Section H, the agreement provides that, in order to strengthen trademark protection, the parties provide adequate and effective protection and control of trademark rights, particularly against unfaithful trademark registrations. The agreement also provides for civil remedies and criminal sanctions to prevent theft and infringement of intellectual property in general. In addition, China has agreed to relax its requirements for proof authentication in civil proceedings, including the removal of certain formalities requiring the seal of a consular officer and the streamlining of certification procedures. Chinese civil court proceedings will also provide appropriate opportunities for the parties to present witnesses and experts and allow for cross-examining of these witnesses. These changes to the Chinese judicial process are an alignment with the legal process in the United States. These amendments should enable U.S.
patent holders to more effectively and effectively enforce intellectual property rights in China. Improving the coherence of litigants abroad may also encourage additional investment in the Chinese market. Toby Mak (Overseas Member) presents the changes. Several aspects will be of interest to British companies if applied effectively, including reducing the requirement for notarized evidence (at least for U.S. firms) and reducing the requirement for mandatory effective technology transfer for investments in China. The debate is also interesting in the context of the UK`s negotiations for a trade agreement with the United States. Many of these changes are already in line with UK and EU practice, but the agreement highlights US concerns about geographical indications and could already lead to restrictions in the UK negotiations and show that the US insists that the pharmaceutical industry is effectively protected.2 The parties agree to strengthen bilateral cooperation on the protection of intellectual property rights and promote pragmatic cooperation in this area.