Sponsored content

In the US-China Phase One trade deal signed on January 15 2020, notable agreements on patents mostly relate to pharmaceutical sectors – Articles 1.10, 1.11 and 1.12. It is possible that these articles may also have implications for other sectors, which remains to be seen in the subsequent implementation. In addition, the provisions on judicial enforcement and procedures should benefit all patent owners. More technical issues such as indirect infringement or changes to the judicial review of invalidation decisions are not addressed. This update provides a brief overview of these key changes.

Attempting to establish a trademark infringement test, on December 18 2019, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released draft Criteria for Determining Trademark Infringement (Consultation Draft), inviting public comments.

Japan has suffered from trade secret theft by Korean companies who enticed Japanese employees. It significantly damaged national interest. Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corp. (now Nippon Steel) sued Posco for trade secret infringement and sought around 100 billion JPY in damages. Posco agreed to pay 30 billion JPY and the parties settled. Toshiba sued SK Hynix for trade secret infringement and sought around 110 billion JPY in damages. SK Hynix agreed to pay around 33 billion JPY and the parties settled.

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) has just issued Memorandum Circular No. 2019-024 entitled Amendments to the Rules and Regulations on Inter Partes Proceedings, which will take effect on February 15 2020. Its objective is to provide speedy, quality and effective legal remedies to resolve IP disputes. The major amendments are as follows:

Recently, the Korean Supreme Court rendered a new en banc decision finding that a final and conclusive decision granting a patent correction cannot constitute a ground for retrial.

The concept of corporate criminal liability was introduced into Vietnamese law under the Penal Code of 2015, which took effect in 2018. Under the 2015 Penal Code, for the first time, corporate entities (companies) could be held criminally liable for a variety of offences, including certain intellectual property crimes under Articles 225 and 226.

Eduardo Kleinberg and Santiago Zubikarai of Basham evaluate the new industrial property legislation under consideration in Mexico, assessing changes to the law on damages, fines, the registration of trademarks and patents

The TRIPS Agreement, to which the Philippines is a signatory, enables governments of member countries with no capacity to manufacture medicines to import/export cheaper pharmaceutical products via a compulsory licence. These are medicines for which they would otherwise have paid a higher price because of existing patents.

On December 25 2019, the Supreme Court promulgated amendments of Several Provisions on Civil Evidence Rules (amendments). The amendments, which will come into effect on May 1 2020, have attracted lots of attention from IP practitioners. The rules are expected to improve the accuracy and standardisation of evidence production procedures and balance the burden of proof between litigants. Below are some highlights of the amendments.

In Fifth Generation Inc. v Titomirov Vodka LLC, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued a precedential ruling, granting Fifth Generation's motion for summary judgment as a sanction in view of Titomirov Vodka's failure to comply with the TTAB's orders, as well as its pattern and practice of avoiding its discovery obligations.

Brazilian IP law believes that renowned marks deserve special protection in all fields of activity. Differently from well-known marks, which are protected within their field of activity and regardless of the existence of a local registration, renowned marks must be registered and then go through a specific proceeding at the BPTO for a declaration of high renown which will be valid for 10 years.

A problem that impacts day to day in our country, and specifically the owners of trademarks, is the deficient or lack of regulation in our legislation regarding what is and what should be understood by "use of a trademark", "use of a trademark in accordance with the customs and habits" and "effective use v token use".