Utynam's Heirs

01 June 2010

A monthly column devoted to IP curiosities and controversies, named in honour of John of Utynam – who received the world’s first recorded patent in 1449 diary@managingip.com

Theatre of the absurd in China's courts

As someone who tends to see the glass as half full when it comes to IP enforcement in China, Utynam was, to put it mildly, disappointed to learn that a court in Henan province is apparently forging verdicts.

According to a report in China Daily last month, the forgery was discovered in March this year when the Xinxiang Municipal Intermediate People's Court re-tried a case.

It all started when Maofeng Company won a suit against the Pingyuan Theatre in the Weibin District People's Court in May 2008 for failure to fulfil a contract.

Eight months later the Xinxiang court upheld the verdict. But, rather than accept the defeat and move on, the theatre appealed to the Henan Provincial Higher People's Court using a different verdict issued by the Weibin District People's Court. This time the Court had helpfully decided that Pingyuan Theatre won...



Only subscribers have complete access to Managing IP Magazine, log in or subscribe now.

Alternatively take a free trial, giving you 48-hour access to Managing IP Magazine (some articles and surveys may be excluded).

Subscribe Now

This article is available to subscribers. Please click subscribe to read the rest of the article.

Subscribe

Take a free trial

Please take a free 48-hour trial to gain limited access. Some articles and surveys may be excluded.

Take a free trial


INTA Daily News 2012

Read this year's INTA Daily News - published daily by Managing IP direct from the 134th INTA Annual Meeting in Washington DC

null null null
null null

May 2012

Do you want to be famous?

Famous, well-known, notorious, reputed: everyone wants enhanced protection for their trade marks. But should they, and what does it mean if it is? Emma Barraclough explains



Most read articles

Poll

Will the new post grant and inter partes review proceedings result in more litigators practising pro hac vice before the USPTO?







Supplements