On 29 May 2020, an official ceremony to announce the amendment appointment, and promotion for National Police Officers and the Labs of the Ministry of Interior was presided over by H.E. General MEACH Sophana, Secretary of State of Interior and President of the Cambodia Counter Counterfeit Committee (CCCC) and Excellencies, Lok Chumteav, Secretary of State, Undersecretary, Deputy Director General, Departments from Ministries, Institutions and members of CCCC, and the Private Sectors including the National Officers of Ministry of Interior. 

On this occasion, H.E. Gen. MEACH reminded that the CCCC has been set up only with a four-members working group and the committee was supported by the French government (FSP Mekong) with the most serious consideration from Prime Minister HUN SEN. H.E Gen. MEACH raised the issue of apparent ‘healthy’ drugs, but in fact are counterfeits that are instead harmful for individual consumption. This is one reason amongst others as to why the CCCC focuses on public health, welfare, and social security as a main concern. 

 Meanwhile, HE Gen. MEACH also mentioned that to fight against counterfeit products, no body or organization or country can carry out this work alone unless we work cooperatively between the committee and the related sectors. 

 Additionally, he conveyed to the newly appointed and appointed officers at the ceremony, as well as to all CCCC officials, that the higher rank will also face more responsibilities. The rank is only a piece of equipment, but the value of personal merit is in the act of fulfilling the duties of the profession. 

 Finally, His Excellency General, would like to request the Excellencies, Lok Chumteavs, Ladies and Gentlemen of the CCCC to continue cooperating to enable Cambodian society to eliminate harmful counterfeit products which occur high risk to health and social safety. Last but not least, at the ceremony, the CCCC handed over three vehicles to the CCCC Secretariat.

We are delighted to announce the promotion of Hau Nguyen to Deputy Director for SE Asia.

Hau joined S&O over five years ago and has advanced through progressively more responsible positions in our Vietnam office, she has played a key role during our expansion of our Southeast Asia offices.

Hau brings a wealth of experience to the Southeast Asia offices, and we are excited about her new role at the firm.

Please join us congratulating Hau her on her well earned promotion.

Read the article here with quotes from our Daniel Greif Director of Southeast Asia

https://www.asiaiplaw.com/section/in-depth/can-you-really-manage-your-ip-rights-while-working-from-home

Author: Hau Nguyen, Daniel Greif

Beginning from 01 December 2019, the online filing system under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (“ePCT”) has been officially accepted by the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (“IP Office”) for international patent applications originating in Vietnam according to an agreement between the IP Office and the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”).

When using the ePCT system, the IP Office sends a “Recordal Copy” to the WIPO International Bureau instead of transferring a hard copy as it was done previously.

The new ePCT process brings many benefits to Vietnamese patent applicants since it offers innovative functions and efficiency producing processes. First, upon filing patent applications through the ePCT system, the patent applications are forwarded quickly and accurately to the International Bureau and Vietnamese applicants do not have to pay any postal fees for sending the dossier to WIPO.

Further, when using the ePCT process, all pertinent information related to patent applications is exchanged electronically between the IP Office of Vietnam, the WIPO International Bureau and the International Searching Authority.

Finally, applicants can download documents, carry out procedures such as amending names and addresses, withdrawing applications, etc. through the online system.

In summary, the ePCT is a welcome addition to the many effective measures that have been implemented in Vietnam to further the interest of intellectual property owners and in turn consumers in Vietnam.

Source: http://www.noip.gov.vn/

Photo on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/6439d3″>Foter.com</a>

Author: Daniel Grief, Hau Nguyen

On September 30, 2019, the Government of Vietnam deposited its instrument of accession to the Geneva Act (1999) of the Hague Agreement.  Then, on December 30, 2019, the Geneva Act (1999) entered into force in Vietnam.

On December 17 and 19, 2019, the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (“IP Vietnam”) organized Conferences in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City to introduce the Hague Agreement system for international industrial design registrations, namely to declare the opening of the examination process and to educate applicants,  Vietnamese lawyers, etc. on how to use the system.

Both Conferences had more than 100 delegates attend from industrial property agencies, businesses, law firms, research centers and universities that have an interest in designs and regularly apply for designs.  In addition, many officials from Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam attended.

The most-discussed content at the Conferences were issues related to Vietnam’s requirements for joining the Hague Agreement. In other words, there was keen interest in Vietnam’s requirements for applications and the examination procedures for industrial design applications that designate Vietnam. When joining the Hague Agreement, Vietnam attempted to harmonize the existing legal differences between Vietnam’s current domestic industrial registration applications and applications registered through the Hague System.

Another issue of keen interest to attendees of the Conferences were ways to apply for designs through the Hague System. Unlike applications for trademarks filed through the Madrid system for international trademark registrations, applicants applying for industrial design registration through the Hague system can submit applications directly to the International Bureau without having to submit a national application, as well as without having to submit an application through the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (“IP Office”). Rather, applications can be mailed or submitted online via the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) portal. In addition, the IP Office acts as an intermediary to receive and send Vietnamese applicants’ applications to the International Bureau.

According to the Vietnam Minister of the Science and Technology Mr. Chu Ngoc Anh, the Hague System was established to register industrial designs in countries by using a single application filed through WIPO’s International Office using a unified currency (the Swiss franc). Under the Hague process, Applicants no longer need to file separate applications in each country to register their designs. This process is efficient and cost-effective for  applicants to register their designs and to handle validity extensions, ownership transfers, and other related processes for their industrial designs.

“The participation in the Hague Agreement meets our practical needs, both creating favorable conditions for domestic and foreign enterprises and individuals in registering industrial designs while ensuring the practice of the commitments of Vietnam in the EVFTA and CPTPP Agreements as well as in ASEAN”, emphasized Minister Chu Ngoc Anh.

The Hague Agreement will assist intellectual property owners in Vietnam to register designs in an efficient and cost-effective manner.  Given the importance of intellectual property in socio-economic development, the positive Hague system processes and the harmonization of design processes according to international standards are welcome developments that will assist intellectual property owners, as well as the Vietnam economy and the people of Vietnam.

Photo by <a href=”https://foter.co/a3/b8b8c9″>Jim 陳</a> on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/6439d3″>Foter.com</a> / <a href=”http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/”>CC BY-SA</a>

For the last 30 years, China has achieved magnificent results in its IP development and leading IP experts compare China’s IP development with the country’s economic growth. The President of the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property, Ms. Pelosi evaluated recent IP development and improvements in China.

In her opinion, China has become one of the most important players in the IP sphere owing to the country’s efforts aiming at protecting and utilizing IP. Ms. Pelosi thinks, that China’s IP has improved due to the following factors – the growth of patent applications worldwide, continuous amendments of IP laws and reduction of processing time on patent examination.

According to the WIPO annual reports on indicators for 2018, the number of patent application forms applied by the Chinese IP governmental body had reached 1.54 million, which was 11.6% higher than in 2017. Ms. Pelosi supposes the growth of international patent applications by the Chinese filers is closely connected with this fact that the main Chinese filers are big Chinese tech companies like Huawei, OPPO, ZTE, which create innovations in the tech sector.

After China joined WIPO in 1980, China had to build a new legal framework in the IP sphere. Since 1980 China has been issuing several legal documents regulating IP questions including Trademark law, Patent law, Copyright law and Regulation on the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. All the aforementioned legal documents are continuously revised because the IP sphere is constantly evolving in the world and the Chinese IP laws must be compatible with the rules of international agreements and treaties.

The reduction of processing time on patent examination also plays a key role in China’s IP improvement. The average time for high-value patent examination took 17.5 months, while the average time for trademark examination was significantly reduced to 4.5 months. However, one of the best improvements related to patent examination is the patent examination system has developed a digital and intelligent version. Moreover, the digital patent examination system helps to raise its efficiency.

Ms. Pelosi highly recommended China to implement further reforms concerned with IP rights. As legal practice shows, Chinese IP offices haven’t elaborated on the Madrid system, especially products’ and services’ identification in trademark applications.

Source: https://epaper.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202002/13/WS5e44a382a310a2fabb7a223f.htm

Photo by Creativity103 on Foter.com / CC BY

CNIPA officially issued statistics for the outgoing year related to patents, trademarks, geographical indicators. The numbers of the aforementioned statistics demonstrated that IP indicators’ quality and work efficiency in 2019 had improved greatly.

CNIPA issued patent statistics taking into account two indicators – domestic vs. foreign applicants and the number of invention patents owned by 10,000 people. As statistics show the number of domestic applicants prevailed over foreign ones. In 2019 domestic applicants had nearly 361,000 patents, 344,000 of them were service patents. Huawei, Sinopec, and OPPO are three top Chinese companies, which have leading positions according to the number of invention patents. Furthermore, Beijing is in the first place according to the number of invention patents owned by every 10,000 people, then follow by Shanghai and Jiangsu province.

As for trademark applications in 2019, CNIPA received over 7 million trademark applications. The total number of registered trademarks in Mainland China reached 6.4 million, while only 6,491 Chinese applicants submitted trademark application forms through the Madrid system. The average time for patent examination was 4.5 months and it exceeded the year’s plan formulated by the State Council. The number of trademark oppositions is much lower in comparison with 2018. In 2019 CNIPA received 144,000 requests for trademark opposition, 90,000 were concluded, 361,000 trademark oppositions were under review and 2/3 of them were successfully concluded.

It is also reported that IP administrations under CNIPA’s jurisdiction across Mainland China handled 39,000 patent infringement cases, 13% of patent infringement cases were related to layout designs of integrated circuits.

After CNIPA issued IP statistics for the last year, IP experts had divided 3 distinct features of IP improvements in China. Firstly, the average time for trademark examination had decreased, and it is considered to be an important sign showing the improvement of quality and efficiency of the IP examination process. Secondly, IP policy and market demand go hand in hand. Thirdly, IP improvements in China are owing to the “openness policy line”, which stimulate foreign applicants to file patent and trademark applications in China. Hence, the “openness policy line” reflects the confidence and vitality of foreign investment in China.

Source: http://www.iprdaily.com/article/index/15375.html

 Photo by mikecogh on Foter.com / CC BY-SA

Author: Hau Nguyen, Daniel Greif

On December 24, 2019, the Cambodian Ministry of Commerce issued a notification (the “Notification”) to clarify the Regulations on Procedures to Record and File Permission Letters for Imported Goods Bearing Exclusive Trademarks, which was enacted on May 31, 2016 (the Regulation”). With the Notification, the Ministry established new requirements to the current procedure which requires importers, with the exclusive right to import and distribute goods that bear a trademark registered in Cambodia, to record that exclusivity in order to enforce their rights against third parties.

The Procedure Established by the Regulation

The Regulation procedure only applies to goods that bear a registered trademark, are genuine, and are new products that have not been sold first in Cambodia. It excludes pharmaceutical products, secondhand goods and goods prohibited by law.

The requirements/documents to register an exclusive distributorship are the following:

• Distributor must be a legal person incorporated in Cambodia.
• The trademark owner and distributor must use a short-form template provided by the Department of Intellectual Property Rights (“DIPR”) by which the trademark owner assigns the exclusive distributorship. The template must be signed by the trademark owner and certified by a notary public or competent authority;
• Trademark certificates as well as a letter from either the trademark owner or the distributor, requesting registration of the exclusive distributorship, must be attached to the template;
• Requests for recordal must be made to the DIPR and accompanied by payment of a fee;
• DIPR’s approval letters are valid for two years, and they are renewable for further two-year periods.

The Regulation allows both trademark owners and distributors who registered an exclusive distributorship, to take enforcement actions against parallel imports. Parallel imports are genuine branded goods obtained from one market (i.e. country, economic area, etc.) that are subsequently imported into another market and sold there without the consent of the IP owner. Despite being prohibited in Cambodia, parallel imports remain a significant issue in Cambodia.

The Clarifications Provided by the Notification

In addition to the above requirements, letters setting out an exclusive distributorship should also lay out the specific models that trademark owners and distributors are authorized to import and distribute. The Ministry specified two ways of listing the goods subject to the exclusive right. They can be specified either:

• as an annex to a short-form template letter of exclusive importation and distribution provided by the DIPR, or
• in a short-form agreement of exclusive importation and distribution.

The Outstanding Issues

Neither the Regulation nor the Notification specify the procedures to enforce actions against parallel imports. As a result, previous practices should be followed.

Trademark owners or distributors who have successfully registered an exclusive distributorship can request the DIPR to forward a copy of its approval letter to the Customs Department. Then, the Customs Department may look out for and stop parallel imports at the border. Trademark owners and distributors may also seek remedies from a court of competent jurisdiction or go through a mediation process in front of the DIPR. However, it is still not clear whether penalties could be applied to these infringements.

Conclusion

The clarifications specified in the Notification will allow trademark owners and exclusive distributors to bring more effective enforcement actions. Also, Cambodia Customs will be able to monitor parallel imports more effectively. Thus, the Notification is a welcome development in the fight against parallel imports in Cambodia.

Source: Cambodian Ministry of Commerce

Photo by USEmbassyPhnomPenh on Foter.com / CC BY-ND

Author: Daniel Grief, Jessica Sangiumpun

The Myanmar Trademark Law 2019 (the “Trademark Law”) was enacted on 30 January 2019.  The Trademark Law is the first official trademark law to exist in Myanmar.  It is expected that the Trademark Law will come into force within the next few months.

The Trademark Law has many important provisions that increase the scope of protection for trademarks and provide for greater efficiencies in the trademark registration process.

The Trademark Law is an important development and brand owners should carefully consider what steps they need to take to ensure their trademarks are registered appropriately under the Trademark Law and are able to reap the benefits provided for trademark owners under the Trademark Law.

Definition of a Mark

The Trademark Law defines a mark as any visually perceptible sign that distinguishes the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings.  It specifies the scope of protection to marks, famous marks, geographical indications and trading names.  These provisions both clarify and expand the definition of trademarks and what types of trade indicia can be protected in Myanmar.

New Registration System for Marks and Geographical Indications

Under the current laws controlling trademarks, brand owners record their marks at the Registration of Deeds Office in Yangon by filing a “Declaration of Ownership,” followed by publishing the registered mark in a Myanmar Newspaper.   The Myanmar Registry of Deeds is not a formal trademark office handling trademark applications and prosecution.

Under the Trademark Law, the Ministry of Commerce has created a formal Trademark Office for handling trademarks application and prosecution.  The new Myanmar Trademark Office will have responsibility for registering marks and geographical indications.

An Inspection Officer will review applications according to the new criteria set by the Law, and a Registration Officer will issue registration certificates to the applicants.

Introduction of First-to-File System

Under the current system, unregistered marks are protected, provided their owners can prove their actual use in commerce. Therefore, an unregistered mark may prevail over a registered mark if the owner of the unregistered mark proves that its use predates the use of the registered mark.

The Trademark Law provides for a first to file system, where the first party to register its trademark will have priority over later filed trademark applications.

Under the Trademark Law, registered marks will have a presumption of validity over unregistered trademarks.  However, it is unclear how the Myanmar Courts will treat trademarks in use but unregistered that predate trademarks registered un the Trademark Law.  It is only after cases are litigated on this issue that there will be clarity on this issue.

Priority Right for Existing Registered Marks

Under the Trademark Law, marks already registered at the Register of Deeds can be re-registered to receive protection. In other words, marks recorded under the Trademark Law will not be automatically re-registered.  Rather, trademarks owners of currently registered marks will be able to file an application for re-registration within a specified period that has yet to be determined. The re-registration will give trademark applicants priority over potential competitors as the re-registered trademark marks have priority going back to the date of the earlier applications filed under the current system.

Absolute and relative grounds for opposing registration

According to the Trademark Law, once an application is received, the Inspection Officer will determine whether the mark should be rejected on absolute grounds.  They must review whether there is an absolute ground for opposing the registration (e.g., the mark lacks distinctiveness. The Inspection Officer, however, will not review whether there are relative grounds for rejecting the applied for mark (e.g., the applicant applied for registration in bad faith, the mark may violate the intellectual property rights of another person…).

If after being considered by the Inspection Officer, no grounds for rejection are identified, the applied for mark will be registered.  After a mark is registered, any interested party will be allowed to request invalidation of the mark at any time based on absolute grounds and within five years based on relative grounds.

Registration of Marks Lacking Distinctiveness

The Trademark Law explicitly excludes from registration marks purely descriptive or generic terms or phrases such as “Myanmar Tours”, “Myanmar Accounting Services”, or “Global Business Solutions”.

Parties wishing to have such terms registered will have to prove that the terms have has acquired distinctiveness through extensive use over time such that consumers have come to associate the terms with a particular source.   Otherwise, the terms will not be registered.

Also, the Registration Officer will delete the registration of any mark that is shown to have become a generic term, upon the request of any interested party.

Failure to Use a Mark

Non-use of a registered mark for three years without good cause, as well as non-use of the goods or services related to a registered mark within three years from the date of application, without good cause, will lead to the withdrawal of the registration for the mark, upon the request of any interested party.

Conclusion

The Trademark Law establishes a comprehensive trademark registration and protection system that, once it becomes effective, will greatly benefit brand owners.  In turn, the economic well-being of Myanmar will increase, and Myanmar consumers will experience greater economic prosperity.  Thus, the Trademark Law is a very welcome intellectual property development and all brand owners should prepare to reap the benefits provided by the Trademark Law.

https://www.tilleke.com/resources/myanmar%E2%80%99s-new-trademark-law-what-foreign-business-owners-need-know

https://www.mmtimes.com/news/key-facts-about-trademark-law.html

https://www.lincolnmyanmar.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Trademark-Law-2019-analysis-1.pdf

Photo by eGuide Travel on Foter.com / CC BY

Author: Jessica Sangiumpun, Daniel Greif

Last year, there were significant developments in Malaysia’s Trademark Laws.

Malaysia’s Trademarks Act 2019, which replaced the former Trademarks Act 1976, was passed on 2 July 2019 after its second reading in the lower house of Parliament of Malaysia, and it was tabled and approved at the upper house of Parliament on 23 July 2019. The Trademarks Act 2019 came into force at the beginning of 2020.

The Trademarks Act 2019 allows Malaysia to fulfill its international obligations as a member of ASEAN.  Also, the Trademarks Act 2019 will assist Malaysia to develop further economically and increase its competitiveness.

This article addresses the following key changes under the Trademark Act 2019 –

• Multi-Class trademark filing procedure; and
• The recognition of non-traditional trademarks.

Multi-Class Procedure

The Trademark Act 2019 allows Malaysian companies to file multiple class trademark applications, as opposed to the former trademark filing system that only allowed single class trademark applications.  The modification to a multiple class trademark application process was necessary to allow Malaysia to accede to the Madrid Protocol, a requirement for Malaysia to fulfill its obligations as a member of the ASEAN Economic Community.

The Madrid Protocol is an international registration system, which provides for the registration and the administration of trademarks in the 122 countries party to the Madrid Protocol.

Malaysia’s accession to the Madrid Protocol allows Malaysian trademark owners to register their trademarks internationally in a cost-effective and efficient manner.  Under the Madrid Protocol, trademark owners can file one trademark application with a single fee at the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Office.  Moreover, the Madrid Protocol allows local Malaysian companies to use a Malaysian trademark application as the base international trademark application, from which the Malaysian companies can then designate additional countries for extending their international trademark application.

Malaysia’s amendments to the Trademark Act 1967 and its accession to the Madrid Protocol will assist Malaysian companies to more easily and efficiently file trademarks abroad.  Also, foreign companies seeking to protect their trademarks in Malaysia will be able to designate Malaysia in their international applications. These new opportunities will result in increased trademark filings in Malaysia and in turn have a positive impact on the Malaysian economy.

Non-Traditional Trademarks 

Section 2(1) of the Trademark Act 2019 provides a wider definition of what can be considered a trademark.  Under the Trademark Act 2019, the word “sign”  now includes “any letter, word, name, signature, numeral, device, brand, heading, label, ticket, shape of goods or their packaging, color, sound, scent, hologram, positioning, sequence of motion or any combination thereof”. This new definition incorporates non-conventional trademarks such as scent, sound, shape, colors, holograms, positioning and motion marks, provided that the trademark is capable of:

• being graphically represented; and
• distinguishing goods or services from those of others.

The Trademark Act 2019 addresses the uncertainty that had existed for the registration of shape marks. The new language makes it clear that shape marks, as well as other non-conventional trademarks, can be registered in Malaysia.  The revision makes Malaysia trademark law more in line with the trademark laws of many other Asian countries, that also provide for registration and protection of non-conventional trademarks.

It will be interesting to see how the Malaysian Trademark Office and the Malaysian Courts handle non-conventional trademarks in practice.  Often when the trademark laws of countries are modified to accept non-conventional trademarks, there is a hesitancy of the trademark offices and the courts to register and accept such trademarks without extensive evidence of secondary meaning.  That is, often there is a reluctance to accept non-conventional trademarks as inherently distinctive and there are requirements enacted in practice requiring a strong showing of acquired distinctiveness to register trademarks.

Conclusion

The Trademark Act 2019 brings welcome modifications to the trademark laws of Malaysia that will further the registration and protection of trademarks in Malaysia, as well as allow Malaysian companies to further their trademark rights in other countries.  By assisting the furtherance of registrations and protection of trademarks in Malaysia, the Trademark Act 2019 will also have a positive impact on furthering economic progress in Malaysia and the well-being of consumers.

References

https://www.bakermckenzie.com/en/insight/publications/2019/09/malaysia-update-trademarks-bill-2019

http://www.mondaq.com/x/830420/Trademark/Critical+Analysis+Malaysias+Trademarks+Bill+2019

https://www.managingip.com/Article/3905843/Malaysia-Does-the-new-Trademarks-Act-2019-advantage-plaintiffs.html

Photo on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/60e03d”>Foter.com</a>

Author: Jessica Sangiumpun

On 24^th February 2020 the Training of Chiang Mai IP Enforcement Officials was held and run by S&O at the Holiday Inn, Chiang Mai. In total 40 officials were present at the training, including Chiang Mai Regional Customs Office, Chiang Dao Customs House, Chiang Mai Airport Customs House, Mae Hong Son Customs House, Provincial Commercial Office and Chiang Mai Police.

These officials are vital resources in combatting counterfeit products in Thailand, and especially in Chiang Mai area which attracts foreigners from all over the world, therefore many counterfeits products are found in this area. Nowadays, due to the change in the economic trends lesser counterfeits item are found on the physical market but an increasing trend in the online market. Currently, most counterfeits that are sold in Chiang Mai are mostly imported from China. Customs officers and police have the power to eliminate the sales of counterfeit products from markets and malls. These authorities are what makes the trainings so essential to the intellectual property community.

The training began with overview of six fashion brands which were represented by S&O. The brands’ history, popular items, background, anti-counterfeiting activities, as well as their evolution were introduced. This launched the meeting into a workshop to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit goods, by showing and passing samples of counterfeit and genuine products. This training emphasized the importance of recognizing counterfeits and is expected to help the officials in their increased anti-counterfeiting efforts.

Lastly, the officials raised several concerns about the control of counterfeit goods. For instance, infringer that crosses the border are usually carrying low quantities of counterfeit goods in order to avoid being seized by the officials. Also, as seizures have been taking a lot of space in their warehouse, officials are asking for a more frequent destruction event in order to eliminate overstocked goods.

Photo on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/60e03d”>Foter.com</a>

According to statistics provided by the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2019, the number of producers who infringe intellectual property rights has increased compared to 2018.

The total amount of damage to rights holders due to the sale of counterfeit goods increased fivefold since 2018.

“In 2019, territorial government revenue authorities suspended goods production at 1,041 declarations of goods with intellectual property rights infringement signs for a total cost of $18 million (KZT 6.9 billion). In 2018, this figure was 468 declarations for goods with an amount of $3.5 million (KZT 1.2 billion),” the Committee noted.

The Committee also noted that the most frequently suspended declarations are on the following goods: automobile spare parts, computer equipment, perfumes, consumer goods, clothing and smartphones accessories, which are included in the customs register.

“In accordance with Articles 198 and 199 of the Code “On Customs Regulation”, if the customs authority has detected violation signs of the right holder during customs operations involving goods, included and not included in the Unified Customs Register of Intellectual Property of the Member States The EAEU or the Customs register of intellectual property of Kazakhstan, the release date for such goods is suspended for 10 days”.

Meanwhile, according to the Committee on Financial Monitoring, in 2019, 28 cases of economic smuggling were registered the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations. Only 8 cases out of 28 were sent to court.

Thus, we can observe that every year in Kazakhstan there is more activity concerning monitoring and policing counterfeit distribution of products, fake products, smuggling, protecting the rights of rights holders, as well as close cooperation with customs authorities in other countries.

Source: https://lsm.kz/vechno-spisyvayushie-v-kazahstane-obnaruzheny-poddelki-na-milliardy-tenge

Photo by <a href=”https://foter.co/a3/09fa70″>Free Grunge Textures – www.freestock.ca</a> on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/cb7a10″>Foter.com</a> / <a href=”http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/”>CC BY</a>

On February 18, the Public Security Departments in China managed with 459 medical cases including counterfeit medicine, surgical masks, medical equipment, and healthcare materials. While the Public Security Departments’ staff was conducting investigations all over China, they detained more than 1000 suspects, destroyed 473 hiding places and found out over 25 million surgical masks, valued at 135 million yuan.

As Harbin Branch of Heilongjiang Public Security Department reported, its working staff broke a big case concerned with infringing surgical masks, destroyed 3 hiding places and confiscated more than 300,000 counterfeit disposable face masks with a total sum of damage ￥8 million. The Public Security Department of Foshan affiliated to Guangdong Public Security Bureau found 2 factories illegally manufactured and sold face masks and medical equipment; 1.2 million surgical masks were seized, the sum of damage exceeded ￥5 million. The Public Security Departments of Chongqing, Anhui and Shandong provinces confiscated 200,000 forensic masks and 40 tons of raw materials. Public Security Department of Shanghai handled a case dealing with counterfeit hard drinks; over 9 tons of alcohol were confiscated at a total value of ￥200,000. Chengdu Public Security Department falling under the Public Security Department of Sichuan province investigated the protective products’ case (medical gloves, no-eye protectors and disposable face masks). As a result of the aforementioned investigation, Chengdu Public Security Department workers confiscated 600 boxes of fake medical gloves, 3 pairs of no-eye protectors and 3000 expired forensic face masks.

The above-mentioned investigations demonstrate, that despite Mainland China and the whole world are suffering from coronavirus epidemy, the Chinese government continues fighting with counterfeit products and decrease their number.

Source: http://english.ipraction.gov.cn/article/TopNews/202002/20200200239698.shtml

Photo by <a href=”https://foter.co/a3/5e1aae”>Go-tea 郭天</a> on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/cb7a10″>Foter.com</a> / <a href=”http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/”>CC BY</a>

The Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, established in 1956, reported that the Institute had recently applied a patent application on the use of Gilead Sciences’ Remdesivir to cure people of a new coronavirus.

Gilead Sciences Inc. jointly with the Chinese Healthcare Department made several examinations in assessing Remdesivir for coronavirus treatment. Remdesivir is a new antiviral drug of nucleotide analogs’ group. This drug was initially introduced by Gilead Sciences to fight with Ebola virus, its results were not successful. The New England Journal of Medicine believed that Remdesivir could fight with new coronavirus, as an American patient infected with 2019-nCoV was prescribed this drug and on the eighth-day doctors proved that the patient’s condition had significantly improved. However, NEJM says that the use of Remdesivir for coronavirus treatment should undergo additional trials.

The Chinese Healthcare Department has chosen the Friendship Hospital in Beijing for conducting additional clinical studies. 270 patients with new coronavirus will participate in this trial.

It is noted that the Wuhan and Military Medicine Institute have submitted the patent application on Remdesivir. The virologists from the aforementioned research centers noted that Remdesivir and chloroquine, used to treat malaria, may be effective in stalling the coronavirus. However, Mr. Zhao, an IP lawyer from Shanghai said that the Wuhan Institute of Virology should get approval from Gilead Sciences because this company was the only owner of Remdesivir drug.

IPR daily reporters reported that the Wuhan Institute filed the patent application on January 21, but if the Institute wanted to cooperate with the other foreign biopharma companies to develop a cure or vaccine against 2019-nCoV, the Institute should withdraw a patent application.

Source: http://www.iprdaily.com/article/index/15372.html

Photo on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/d3114e”>Foter.com</a>

Schmitt & Orlov

Beijing Haidian District People’s Court started handling a trademark infringement and unfair competition case between Cadbury UK Limited Co. and Yikoulian Xiamen Food Co. As Beijing Haidian District People’s Court representatives reported, Yikoulian Company had strictly violated the Trademark law of the Mainland of China. The essence of the law violation is the company has changed the original trademark name Cadbury into the Chinese name怡口蓮 (Yikoulian), but preserved the original products’ design and styles. According to the preliminary hearing in the court, Yikoulian Xiamen Food Co. has to remove all negative effects, furthermore this company has been made to pay damage fine in the sum of ￥2.43 million to Cadbury.

Cadbury UK Limited Co. is considered to be one of the biggest and oldest confectionary companies in the world. Cadbury confirmed the information that the company had already registered a trademark for怡口蓮 in several classes. At the same time the respondent produced, sold and distributed advertisements with rice crackers under怡口莲 trademark. As a result, Yikoulian Company enjoyed Cadbury’s good reputation, consumers were in bewilderment which of these products were original or fake ones and Yikoulian Company became a participant of unfair competition.

In its turn, Yikoulian Company argued, despite怡口莲 trademark was declared to be invalid by Beijing Haidian District People’s Court in September; it was legal to use the trademark during its validity period.

When the hearing finished, the staff from Beijing Haidian District People’s Court revealed that sandwich rice crackers with the 怡口莲 trademark could be still found on markets stalls, in spite of the fact Beijing Haidian District People’s Court had already made a decision that怡口莲 trademark had to be invalidated in a shorter period of time. The fake 怡口莲 trademark is completely identical to the original 怡口蓮 trademark in its design, style, pronunciation and meaning of the Chinese word expression; the only difference between the real and infringed trademarks are the last Chinese characters in the word expression. Moreover, both trademarks are related to a foodstuff category. Hence, owing to the aforementioned evidences Beijing Haidian District People’s Court made a decision the infringed 怡口莲 trademark had to be invalidated as the infringer violated an unfair competition rule.

Source: http://www.mondaq.com/china/x/880232/Trademark/Cadbury+Awarded+Injunction+RMB+243+Million+In+Trademark+Infringement+Case

Photo by <a href=”https://foter.co/a3/cd5944″>rore</a> on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/ffe04a”>Foter.com</a> / <a href=”http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/”>CC BY-SA</a>

Schmitt & Orlov

It has been recently announced that the well-known American media company MGM Holdings Inc. has sued the Chinese company MGM Films for infringing MGM Holdings Inc. trademark and breaking the main principle of IP – the principle of unfair competition. As China Daily reported, MGM Films company registered the logo with lions which was identical to the original trademark of MGM Holdings Inc. and opened more than 30 cinemas across China and worked under this brand name and logo. As a result, one of the IP Courts in China returned a verdict that MGM Films company had to pay 3 million yuan for each case. It is worth while noting, that the sum of 3 million yuan is the highest legal damage according to the Chinese Trademark Law. Hence, the total amount of legal damage was 6 million yuan.

The Chinese IP Court decision of the aforementioned case has shown that China is becoming stricter to protect IPR and interests of foreign entities. Moreover, it isn’t the only case in China in which Chinese firms have to pay the maximum amount of legal damage to foreign entities for their infringed trademarks. In its turn, foreign entities can be completely sure that the Chinese government is interested in protecting IPR of foreign entities and ready to make everything for improving IPR and IP laws. Improving the latter items will lead to the improvement of the business environment between Chinese and foreign entities.

The matter of business environment is both related to domestic and foreign entities, which are able to compete fairly on “a level playing field”. In the end of the 20th century the Chinese entities weren’t able to compete with foreign entities due to their weakness and imperfect legislation. However, times have changed and, as international practice shows, it is an important measure for Chinese laws to create a business environment, where foreign and domestic entities will compete fairly. If foreign and domestic entities abide by fair competition rules, China’s economy will be able to develop in a right way.

Source: https://epaper.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202001/06/WS5e127b7ba310fb3de82eb4fc.html;

http://www.iprdaily.com/article/index/15350.html

Photo on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/a40c8b”>Foter.com</a>

Ministry of Interior, 31^st January 2020
To gain more knowledge to the competent authorities regarding the genuine and counterfeit products, the Cambodia Counter Counterfeit Committee (The CCCC), allowed Schmitt & Orlov to conduct the training on the topic of  “ANTI-COUNTERFEIT”, by H.E. Lt. Gen. Sar Sithik, Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Interior and Permanent Vice-President of the CCCC.

The Republic of Uzbekistan adopted the first unified regulation on personal data on 02 July 2019, the Law no. ZRU-547 on Personal Data, entered into force on 01 October 2019. Previously, personal data had been regulated by various legislations.

Pursuant to Article 4 of the Law, a personal data is information fixed on electronic, paper and other material relating to a physical person or making it possible to identify this person. The physical person to which personal data belong is called the subject of personal data. The entity who has the right of possession of the personal data is the owner, and the entity who performs personal data processing is the operator. Personal data could be name, date and place of birth, phone number or profession of the person.

According to Article 7 of the Law, the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan is in charge of the regulation of personal data. The personal data can be processed after obtaining the consent of subjects. The consent can be expressed in any form that allows verifying its existence. The subject may withdraw their consent at any time. The operator should define the purposes of data processing.

In case of non-compliance with the provisions of the law, the Law no. ZRU-548 on Amendments and Additions to the Criminal, Criminal Procedural and Administrative Liability codes of the Republic of Uzbekistan of 08 July 2019, provides administrative and criminal sanctions. Sanctions are imposed in order to prevent illegal collection, storage, modification, use, transfer or destruction of personal data.

Photo on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/34687a”>Foter.com</a>

In November and December 2019 officials from Gongbei, Shekou, Tianjin and Dongxing Customs invited the staff of Schmitt & Orlov company to participate in training events, devoted to the IPR topical questions. All the training sessions were conducted in the aforementioned Customs houses; more than 30 officials and custom officers attended these training sessions.

On 1 November Gongbei Customs arranged a training session in Zhuhai city. Zhuhai is one of the important cities of Guangdong province and one of the central cities of the Pearl River Delta. Furthermore, Zhuhai has got 9 first-class sea ports and owing to this fact, Gongbei Customs plays a significant role in cracking down IP infringements.

The officials of Gongbei Customs reported, they successfully joined to a six-month “Longteng Action”, due to which Gongbei Customs had taken protection measures for 94 batches of shipments, among them, 19 batches had been confirmed as an infringement, involving 147,000 pieces of infringing goods.

The other IPR training was arranged by Shekou Customs on 19 November. Shekou Customs is affiliated to Shenzhen Customs in Nanshan District, Shenzhen city. Shekou Port is one of the largest transit centers of China. Hence, Shekou Customs plays an important role in cracking down infringements coming in and out of Shenzhen.

According to Shekou Customs’ report, this Customs mainly deals within fringing goods through a freight channel, and the infringing goods are garments, different bags, shoes and light industrial products, as well as electronics.

On 3 December S&O attended a training session, having arranged by Tianjin Customs. Tianjin Customs is one of the few Customs in Northern China, which seizes the biggest amount of counterfeit products coming out of China. For 2019 Tianjin Customs has been seizing 10 batches of infringing IPR cases, with more than 660,000 pieces of goods and the damage price exceeds 99.3 million yuan. In general, the infringing goods include bikes, hard drinks, sporting shoes, solar batteries, famous branded bags, kids’ toys, garments etc.

On 9 December S&O participated in a training session, having arranged by Dongxing Customs. Dongxing, a county-level city under the jurisdiction of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, it borders with China in the south west and with the Beibu Gulf in the southeast and with Vietnam in the southwest. Dongxing Port is one of the three land border ports with the largest number of people entering and leaving China.

Despite Dongxing Customs is affiliated to Nanning Customs, but handling IPR cases is under their jurisdiction. Dongxing Customs seize counterfeit goods through Pingxiang and Dongxing Ports. Dongxing customs usually confiscate footwear, mobile phone accessories, sports equipment, stationery, etc.

Gongbei, Shekou, Tianjin and Dongxing Customs have drawn to the conclusion that, the amount of counterfeit products is constantly increasing. Customers think that only joint effort will help to cope with IPR problems and decrease the quantity of infringing products in the regions controlled by the aforementioned Customs.

Photo by <a href=”https://foter.co/a3/ce0e04″>BBluesman</a> on <a href=”https://foter.com/re5/a70f6c”>Foter.com</a> / <a href=”http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/”>CC BY-NC-SA</a>