How the hottest enterprises protect their overseas

  • Detail

With the rapid development of China's foreign trade, intellectual property disputes are also increasing day by day. How to carry out intellectual property litigation overseas is a practical problem that China's export enterprises must face. A recent "dialogue" program of CCTV has conducted in-depth discussion on some problems existing in Chinese enterprises' response to intellectual property disputes. Relevant cases are worth learning from and learning from domestic enterprises

in the "dialogue" program of this issue, gaohucheng, Vice Minister of the Ministry of Commerce, believed that the shortcomings of Chinese enterprises in responding to foreign intellectual property lawsuits were mainly manifested as follows: first, they lacked experience in this field and were not familiar with foreign intellectual property laws; Second, the litigation cost investment is not enough, especially in the case of uncertainty about the time and the victory or defeat of the litigation

taking Zhejiang Tongling Technology Group (hereinafter referred to as Tongling Technology) as an example, which participated in the "dialogue" program, the product that triggered the patent dispute between the group and the American Leighton company is the leakage protector. This product is a mandatory product in the United States. It has been mandatory since more than 20 years ago. Each American family needs at least 8 of them, and the market value is 4billion US dollars/year. Levton has basically monopolized the market for more than 20 years. The products exported by Tongling technology to the U.S. market pose a threat to levton

in 2004, Leighton filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Tongling technology, and later expressed its willingness to settle, and invited the president of Tongke shuoling technology to the United States for negotiation. The president of Tongling technology went to the negotiation with gifts and expressed his sincere desire for reconciliation. However, the attitude of lefoton company was disappointing. The native of Guangzhou believed that the reconciliation condition put forward intentionally was that people should find their own world in life. At the same time, they could also adopt contingency or other more advanced testing methods. After paying the patent royalties, they should also acknowledge patent infringement in writing through Tongling technology

therefore, the negotiation between the two parties broke down. Tongling technology and levton started a lawsuit war. Tactically, instead of directly suing Tongling technology, the company sued four dealers of Tongling technology in the United States, and the four sued objects were distributed in four states far away, which objectively increased the litigation costs of the defendants

such litigation costs a lot. In a short period of more than one year, Tongling technology has paid US $2million in attorney fees. At present, the lawsuit is still in progress

Vice Minister Gao Hucheng suggested that enterprises should consider the following factors when responding to the lawsuit: first, the importance of the sued product to the maintenance of the enterprise, so there is no other consideration when life and death are at stake; Second, mont-sh6 has strong adsorption capacity for heavy metals cadmium and lead, and the accuracy of its own relevant patents and intellectual property rights; Third, good logistic support means sufficient funds

the reason why Zhejiang Tongling technology has filed a lawsuit with the American levton company is that the most important and only market of the group's products is the United States, so there is no way back and it can only compete with the United States

when an enterprise carries out intellectual property rights protection overseas, litigation cost is a prerequisite that must be considered. Therefore, enterprises can choose reconciliation

in view of the particularity of intellectual property litigation, some experts have pointed out that legal remedy should consider the cost. For example, a domestic enterprise successfully invalidated a patent of an American enterprise in China, making its related products unimpeded in the domestic market. However, when its products entered the U.S. market, for the domestic patents with the same contents as those of the U.S. enterprises, the enterprise not only did not mention that they were invalid, but paid a patent royalty for this purpose, so that its products could be sold in the United States "in a fair name". The company explained that, compared with the cost of invalid U.S. patents, the royalty paid is very economical, and it can also get the profits of the product in the United States. This economic account of the enterprise is very realistic

with the increasingly perfect intellectual property system, our enterprises should respect the intellectual property rights of others and learn to protect their own intellectual property rights. China has not only established an intellectual property reporting center, but also an overseas intellectual property rights protection service center for enterprises

in this situation, Chinese enterprises should make full use of the favorable conditions and strive to safeguard their intellectual property rights. (end)

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI