HOME - China IP Law Blog

AI Intellectual Property

China’s First Case Involving AI-Generated Voice Infringement

Introduction: The Emerging Landscape of AI Voice Rights Protection The swift progress of artificial intelligence has dramatically changed the ways we create, share, and consume digital content. One of the most revolutionary developments is AI voice synthesis technology, which allows for the creation of highly realistic, human-like voices from text input. While this technology holds vast commercial opportunities across sectors such as entertainment and customer service, it also brings complex legal challenges concerning the protection of personality rights—especially those related to the human voice. China has become a global frontrunner in both AI innovation and regulation. A recent landmark decision by the Beijing Internet Court in China’s first case involving infringement of AI-generated voice rights (Case No. (2023) Jing 0491 Min Chu No. 12142) marks a pivotal moment in defining the legal limits of AI voice technology. This ruling offers vital insights into how Chinese courts interpret the intersection of

November 17, 2025 No Comments

Non-Use Cancellation China

China Changing Trademark Non-Use Cancellation System：An In-Depth Review for Overseas Stakeholders

Introduction: Fundamental Principle and Recent Changes China trademark system, like many worldwide, is based on the principle that trademarks must be actively used. A trademark is not just a registration certificate but a commercial asset that identifies the source of goods or services. To uphold this, Article 49(2) of China Trademark Law allows anyone—individuals or organizations—to request cancellation of a registered trademark if it has not been used for three consecutive years without valid reason. This three-year non-use cancellation (known as 撤三) was designed to clear inactive trademarks from the register and empower the public, including competitors and concerned citizens, to prevent misuse such as hoarding or squatting. However, since 2025, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has introduced stricter evidence requirements during the review process to curb abusive 撤三 filings. While aiming to prevent misuse, these new rules have unintentionally narrowed the range of eligible applicants, making the

November 12, 2025 No Comments

Navigating the Intricacies of Damages in Chinese IP Battles: An In-Depth Dive into Street Basketball Trademark Case

Over the last ten years, China legal framework has made remarkable progress by enhancing IP protections, establishing specialized courts, and raising statutory damage limits. The government stance is clear: IP is a valuable asset, and violations will face penalties. Nonetheless, there often remains a considerable gap between the legal entitlement to prevent others from using your IP and the practical ability to secure financial compensation that accurately reflects the infringement value. Calculating damages is the most complicated and frequently contested part of IP enforcement in China. Even a ruling in favor of infringement can feel hollow if the awarded damages are minimal. This article seeks to clarify the process of determining damages in China through an in-depth, firsthand examination of a recent, illustrative case: JOYCITY Corporation v. Chengdu Lemondo Technology Co., Ltd. and Giant Network Group entities (Case No. (2024) Hu 73 Min Zhong No. 436). Acting as counsel for

November 6, 2025 No Comments

Why Registering a Trademark in China Has Become Increasingly Challenging: A Key Guide for Foreign Brands

China offers unmatched business opportunities for overseas businesses. However, before selling products or promoting services, they must face a critical and growing obstacle: the trademark registration process. Recently, the rejection rate for trademark applications has surged to record highs. By early 2025, China had about 50 million active registered trademarks, with nearly 20,000 new applications submitted daily. The numbers are telling. In 2024, China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) examined over 6.6 million applications, but the initial approval rate dropped to just under 54%, meaning nearly half of all applications were rejected. This raises an important question for foreign brands: why has obtaining a trademark in China become so difficult? Is it simply due to a lack of originality, or are there deeper, more influential factors? Understanding this reality is essential for developing a successful market entry plan. The Scale Challenge: Operating in a Saturated Market China trademark environment resembles

November 4, 2025 No Comments

China Trademark Infringement Damages

Limiting and Eliminating the “Other Improper Means” Clause in China Trademark Legislation

This article is a translation of a work by Professor Kong Xiangjun. The original text can be found at: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzUwOTg0MTkwNA==&mid=2247486267&idx=1&sn=a92bcb198c7723302ecba094fee3ea85&scene=21&poc_token=HAFTBGmjqSmbXCdR7tezsfxsbrG2EbtMGK9BEFJX Key Issues in the Current Use of “Other Unfair Means” In current practice regarding trademark invalidation, the application of “other unfair means” faces several significant challenges: (a) Whether it should be applied alongside Article 4, Paragraph 1. During the enforcement of the Trademark Law in 2001 and 2013, “other unfair means” primarily targeted trademarks registered without genuine intent to use. This led to the inclusion of a prohibition in Article 4, Paragraph 1 in the 2019 revision, raising questions about whether the former has been superseded by the latter and whether its scope has effectively disappeared. (b) Whether trademark registrations based on association (parasitic trademarks) fall under “other unfair means.” Both the 2021 Trademark Examination and Trial Standards by the National Intellectual Property Administration and the 2019 Trial Guidelines for

October 31, 2025 No Comments

The Strategic Importance of Protecting Trade Secrets – Lessons from Lao Gan Ma

In the global food industry, which is worth trillions of dollars, proprietary recipes are more than just ingredients—they are crucial competitive assets. The longstanding efforts of Coca-Cola to safeguard its formula and the notable 2016 case involving the theft of Lao Gan Ma’s chili sauce recipe, which caused losses exceeding ten million renminbi, clearly demonstrate the high stakes involved. For food companies, choosing how to protect intellectual property is a vital strategic decision: patents provide twenty years of exclusivity but require full public disclosure, whereas trade secrets can offer indefinite protection if strict confidentiality measures are maintained. Data from China Judgments Online shows a worrying trend, with lawsuits over food trade secrets increasing by an average of 37% annually from 2020 to 2024, and formulation theft making up 68% of these cases, highlighting the growing risks. Risk 1: Insufficient Compliance with Legal Requirements for Trade Secret Protection Many companies fall

October 31, 2025 No Comments

Navigating Trademark Similarity Challenges in the Chinese Market: A Strategic Guide for Foreign Companies

For international businesses aiming to enter the expansive Chinese market, securing trademark protection is a vital step. However, a common challenge arises when your carefully developed trademark is deemed “similar” to one already registered or pending. This situation is not a dead end but rather a strategic juncture that calls for thoughtful planning and effective tactics. Understanding your options is essential to safeguarding your brand and advancing confidently. This article offers a comprehensive overview of how to address trademark similarity issues in China. Strategy 1: Enhance and Adapt Your Trademark to Strengthen Distinctiveness A practical and often cost-efficient approach is to creatively refine your existing trademark. This involves more than just adding or removing words; the objective is to make your revised trademark clearly distinct from the conflicting mark in sound, appearance, and meaning to avoid consumer confusion. For instance, if your brand is “AURA” and a similar mark exists

October 28, 2025 No Comments

A Quick Dive into How China Timestamp Forensics Serves as a Guardian of IP Rights

For foreign companies aiming to safeguard their intellectual property in China, collecting reliable evidence can feel like a daunting task—especially when violations happen away from public attention. Traditionally, notarization has been the preferred method, but it often requires significant time and financial resources. Now, a groundbreaking court ruling has approved a new, efficient alternative: Trusted Timestamps. This advanced digital forensic tool recently played a key role in winning a trademark infringement case, demonstrating its effectiveness and promise. Explore this case study to learn how your business can use this innovative approach to strengthen its IP protection throughout China. Case Study: The Legitimacy of Using Trusted Timestamps as Evidence in Trademark Enforcement in China A well-known sports functional drink brand (referred to as the Rights Holder) holds strong recognition in the Chinese market. Since 2015, however, the Rights Holder discovered that a functional drink authorized by another company (the Infringer) was

October 22, 2025 No Comments

Cleansing the Shadows of Bad Faith? Exploring the Rule and Its Exception in Article 44 of the China Trademark Law

Insights from the Hualing HUALING Saga on Trademark Transfers In today’s environment of increasingly strict intellectual property protection in China, trademarks have become more important than ever as key corporate assets. Nevertheless, malicious activities related to trademark registration, such as hoarding and squatting, continue to pose challenges that disrupt market order. Article 44, Paragraph 1 of the Trademark Law, which deals with registrations obtained through other improper means, serves as the fundamental legal basis for addressing such conduct and preserving the integrity of the registration system. Traditionally, judicial practice has adhered to a strict principle: bad faith cannot be excused. However, a recent decision in the Hualing HUALING trademark invalidation case has shown a flexible approach under certain conditions, attracting significant attention and prompting deep reflection within the industry. I. The Fundamental Debate: Can a Transfer Remove the Original Sin of a Bad-Faith Registration? Article 44, Paragraph 1 of the

October 21, 2025 No Comments

The 2025 George Patton Metaverse Trademark Showdown: What Led a Virtual Car to Rack Up a RMB 1 Million Fine?

On July 21, 2025, the Hangzhou Intermediate Court delivered a second-instance ruling in the trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute concerning the George Patton brand Case No.: (2024) Zhe 01 Min Zhong 10520. This landmark case, recognized as the first involving metaverse virtual reality trademarks, has garnered widespread attention. The court not only upheld the claims of traditional trademark infringement and unfair competition but also determined that the virtual George Patton vehicle equipment used in the game Peace Elite—authorized by the infringing party—qualifies as goods similar to the real-world George Patton vehicles, thereby constituting trademark infringement. This judgment is significant in clarifying whether trademark protection for physical products can extend into virtual environments. Case Summary In the George Patton case, the defendants were accused of multiple infringing actions. For the purpose of this discussion, the relevant facts are summarized as follows: George Patton (G. Patton) is an ultra-luxury armored off-road

September 28, 2025 No Comments

China IP & Commercial Law Insights

China IP Law Blog

Follow us