Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Chinese companies may not have home-court advantage

A new report suggests that foreign plaintiffs in IP cases are winning at higher rates in Chinese courts than Chinese rights holders, notwithstanding long-standing concerns about bias in favour of domestic enterprises

According to a study from Thomson Reuters, in cases since 2006 involving foreign plaintiffs and Chinese defendants, the plaintiff won approximately 75% of the time. Meanwhile, Chinese plaintiffs facing Chinese defendants only prevailed 63% of the time.

Foreign plaintiffs also generally received higher statutory compensation- the mean award was slightly over Rmb 200,000 ($32,300) in cases with foreign rights holders, as opposed to about Rmb 120,000 for Chinese patent holders.

Though this data does not conclusively refute concerns of domestic bias in Chinese courts (for example, the difference in quality in patents held by international versus domestic companies may help to explain the higher rates of success), it does demonstrate the complexity of the issue.

Other interesting tidbits from the report:

· While more Chinese patent applications are directed at data processing systems than any other category, inventors are also filing many patents in categories such as digital information transmission, pharmaceuticals, alkaloids/plant extracts and polymer applications. In fact, filings from Chinese inventors hold nearly 80% of global applications for inventions involving alkaloids and plant extracts, about 60% of applications for general pharmaceutical activities and more than half of all patents involving polymerisation and polymer chemical modification.

· The report noted that in 2008, each Chinese patent in the data processing category received on average 1.17 forward citations. Though this is notably lower than US patents in this field (6.72 forward citations per patent), it is comparable to Japanese patents (1.82 forward cites), Europe (1.31 forward cites) and South Korea (0.76 forward cites). Data processing is the most active field for Chinese patent filers, and forward citations is one metric that some use to evaluate patent quality.

· Patent applications in China increased by 16.3 percent between from 2012 to 2013, with similarly large increases each year since 2009. However, filings by foreign applicants stayed relatively flat during this period, and thus making up a smaller portion of total patent filings in China.

The full report, "China’s Innovation Quotient – Trends in Patenting and the Globalisation of Chinese Innovation", can be found here.


more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Civil society and industry representatives met in Geneva on Thursday, September 28 to discuss a potential expansion of the TRIPS waiver
Sources say the beta version of the USPTO’s new trademark search tool is a big improvement over the current system but that it isn’t perfect
Canadian counsel weigh in on the IP office’s decision to raise trademark filing fees in 2024 and how they’re preparing clients
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Shira Perlmutter, US Register of Copyrights, discussed the Copyright Office's role in forming generative AI policy during a House of Representatives hearing
The award marks one of the highest-ever damages received by a foreign company in a trademark infringement suit in China
Two orders denying public access to documents have reignited a debate over a lack of transparency at the new court
Rouse’s new chief of operations and the firm’s CEO tell Managing IP why they think private equity backing will help it conquer Europe
Brian Landry, partner at Saul Ewing, reveals how applicants can prosecute patent applications in the wake of the Federal Circuit's In re Cellect ruling
Ronelle Geldenhuys of Australia’s Foundry IP considers the implications complex computer technologies such as AI have on decision-making