VOL. 17 NO. 07 JUL. 16, 2009 http://www.industry.net.tw http://www.patent.org.tw g.tw
MEASURES
MEASURES
Chain Stores Encounter Copycats in China and Are in Need of Cross-Strait Negotiation on Intellectual Property Rights Protection.
According to a news report by Mei-Lan Kuo of the Central News Agency, the first annual Taiwan Chain Store Franchise and Cross-Strait Innovation Show opened at the Taipei World Trade Center on June 26, 2009. The Chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation, Bin-Kwen Jian, indicated that the chain store and franchise industry is booming in Taiwan.
The main obstacle faced by many Taiwanese chain store corporations exploring the market in China is the existence of copycat. Currently, trademark is a troublesome issue encountered by these corporations.
It is hoped that China can help protect the well-known trademarks of these Taiwanese corporations and enhance cross-strait negotiation on intellectual property related issues. The corporations exploring the Chinese market should better protect its assets by properly registering its intellectual property rights. He stressed that it is an important subject to promote cross-strait economic exchange with respect to trademark, patent and copyright.
When inquired about the copycat trademark in China, Bin-Kwen Jian stated that the owner of Yung-Ho Soy Drink discussed this issue with him before.
rights in the urban areas in China, it is harder to enforce such right in the suburban areas. This is similar to the situations occurred 20 to 30 years ago, when Taiwan was accused as a counterfeit country.
He indicated that under the pressure of the United States, Taiwan has established a thorough protection in intellectual property rights. It is hoped that China can make an effort in this direction.
The general manager of Yung-Ho Soy Drink, Jien-Hsiung Lin, indicated that in the past years, the company has continued its effort in enforcing its trademark rights in China. However, it is hard to estimate a specific damage amount currently. In fact, it is hard to enforce its right in such a mass territory in China. He hopes the government of Taiwan can help assist enforcing the trademark rights of the Taiwanese corporations in China because the profits of the corporations are lost as a result of these copycat trademarks. This problem not only hinders the development of the Taiwanese corporations in China, but also damages the harmonic relationship across the strait.
LAWS & REGULATIONS
TIPO Established Draft Implementing Rules for ISP Liability Bill.
In accordance with Article 90terdecies of the Copyright Act amended and promulgated on May 13,
with the public announcement of the contact window under Article 90quinquies, and the content of the notification and counter notification, required particulars, supplementation or correction, and other requisite matters under Articles 90septies through 90decies shall be prescribed by the competent authority, the Intellectual Property Office of the Ministry of Economic Affairs established the draft implementing rules for Internet Service Provider Liability Bill and held a public hearing on June 30.
The draft stipulates 7 rules. The main points are summarized as below.
1. The provision on the basis of legal authorization of the Implementing Rules (Rule 1).
2. The provision on the information in connection with the public announcement of the contact window made by the ISP (Rule 2).
3. The provision on the required documents for the notification made by the right holder as well as the procedures for supplementation or correction (Rules 3 and 4).
4. The provision on the required documents for the counter notification made by the user a well as the procedures for supplementation or correction (Rules 5 and 6).
5. The provision on the effective date of the Implementing Rules (Rule 7).
LAWS & REGULATIONS
The Substantive Examination Guidelines for Invention Patent Regarding Chinese Herb Related Inventions became Effective on June 3, 2009.
The Intellectual Property Office of the Ministry of Economic Affairs established and published the Substantive Examination Guidelines for Invention Patent – Section II, Chapter 10 – Chinese Herb Related Inventions on June 3, 2009. The Guidelines became effective on the same day.
The Examination Guidelines for Chinese Herb-Related Invention Patents are constituted as the basis for matters in need of special determination and handling procedures in the examination of Chinese herb-related invention patent applications.
Inventions applicable to Chapter 10 of the Guidelines include single compound, pharmaceutical compositions, diagnostic or testing agents, and cosmetics. Examination of Pharmaceutical-related invention that is common to that in other chapters shall follow the guidelines in those chapters.
TIPO particularly indicated in the forward that the examples provided in the chapter are used for explicating the Guidelines only and should not be relied upon as the form for drafting a specification.
The examples are only meaningful in explaining specific issues and cannot be regarded as meeting other prerequisites for a patent.
LAWS & REGULATIONS
TIPO Plans to Draft an Amendment to Patent Examination Guidelines Regarding Formality Examination of Utility Model Patents.
The Intellectual Property Office of the Ministry of Economic Affairs plans to draft an amendment to Patent Examination Guidelines, Section 1, and Chapter 4, regarding formality examination of utility
model patents and held a public hearing on June 8, 2009.
The main points of the draft amendment to Patent Examination Guidelines regarding formality examination of utility patents are summarized as below:
1. Add sample examination cases.
2. Modify the format of annotation (change the Chinese number characters to Arabic numerals), and place the explanatory notes on the
applicability of the laws under one single section.
3. Modify the paragraph related to an invention contrary to public order, morality or public health so as to be consistent with that in Section II, Chapter 2 – Invention Patents.
4. Insert provision to stipulate amendment by ex officio action.
5. Delete provisions not related to formality examination.
6. Delete provisions related to the determination of whether a correction exceeds the scope of notification sent by the Intellectual Property Office.
LAWS & REGULATIONS
The Ministry of Economic Affairs Announced to Establish Patent Attorney Disciplinary Rules.
In accordance with Paragraph 1, Article 154 of the Administrative Procedure Act and Article 31 of the Patent Attorney Act, the Ministry of Economic Affairs Announced to establish Patent Attorney Disciplinary Rules on June 17, 2009.
The Patent Attorney Act was promulgated on July 11, 2007 and became effective on January 11, 2008. In order to strength the management of patent attorneys and protect the interests of patent applicants so as to maintain an order among patent attorneys, Article 31 of the Patent Attorney Act stipulates that the Competent Authority shall establish the Patent Attorney Disciplinary Committee to handle matters in connection with disciplinary actions imposed on patent attorneys.
The organization, the rules of procedure and other rules to be observed are to be prescribed by the Competent Authority. Accordingly, the Ministry of Economic Affairs refers to relevant professional and technical personnel disciplinary organization and review procedures to draft the Patent Attorney Disciplinary Rules.
The draft stipulates 17 rules. The main points are summarized as below:
1. The organization of the Patent Attorney Disciplinary Committee: the number of disciplinary
committee members is set between 13 and 15 people, including the representatives from the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Patent Attorneys, and scholars, or representatives of neutral party with professional knowledge; the term of committee membership is set to two years.
2. The review procedures of the Patent Attorney Disciplinary Committee: the chief committee member of the disciplinary committee members is to be the chairperson; circumstances for committee members to disqualify himself/herself; disciplinary review shall be accepted after two committee members are designated to conduct initial review by the chief committee member; numbers of committee members to review and vote are to be explicitly stipulated; disciplinary review is not to be stayed
during criminal investigation or examination (draft rules 5 to 10).
3. Disciplinary decision made by the Patent Attorney Disciplinary Committee: the disciplinary penalty is not affected by the criminal penalty;
matters to be included in the disciplinary decision.
4. Other matters: those disagreeing with the disciplinary decision made by the Patent Disciplinary Committee shall request for an appeal at the Executive Yuan within thirty days upon receiving the disciplinary decision; the committee members are not employed but may be paid for examination, attendance and transportation.
LAWS & REGULATIONS
Amendment to Partial Articles of Optical Disc Act Promulgated on May 27, 2009.
The amendments to Articles 17, 18 and 20 of the Optical Disk Act were promulgated on May 27, 2009.
According to the amendments to the Optical Disk Act, a reduction of one-third of the original fine
amount is allowed if the failure by manufacturers to inscribe Source Identification codes or stampers is
due to negligence and if written authorization by the right holder can be produced by the manufacturers.
In order to curb illegal imprinting of pirated optical disks in factories, the Optical Disk Act requires all manufactured optical disks or stampers be inscribed with Source Identification (SID) Codes. Violators will be sentenced to fines between NT$1,500,000 to NT$3,000,000. However, in order to allow for more consideration of the relative severity of individual violations due to negligence, legislators proposed the amendment to this Act so that the fine may be reduced by one-third if the manufacturers can produce the written authorization by the right holder.
Additionally, regarding the failure to apply for amendment in advance of changes to licensing information, violators used to be sentenced with fines between NT$1,500,000 to NT$3,000,000.
Due to the complexity of the types of business registrations, legislators proposed a grace period of 15 days to allow the manufacturers to complete the registration. The fine is sentenced only after the grace period expires.
TAIWAN IPR NEWS
PUBLISHER／PRESTON W. CHEN PUBLISHING AGENCY／
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF／LIEN-SHENG TSAI INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COMMITTEE,
DEPUTY EDITOR-IN-CHIEF／JOSEPH C. CHEN CHINESE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDUSTRIES EDITORS／FRANCK LIN, ANFERY HSU ADDRESS／12TH FL., 390, FU HSING S. RD., SEC. 1,
TRANSLATOR／SUZY SHOUNG TAIPEI, TAIWAN, R.O.C.
TEL／886-2-27033500 FAX／886-2-27042477 E-MAIL／intell@cnfi.org.tw
THIS PUBLICATION IS FUNDED BY
THE GOVERNMENT INFORMATION OFFICE AND THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE, MOEA
