Please wait while the page is loading...

loader

Asia IP’s editorial team reveals China’s top IP firms 2023, practices

31 March 2023

Asia IP’s editorial team reveals China’s top IP firms 2023, practices

Steadily improving protection of intellectual property rights has been a key element of China’s rise to become one of the world’s top economies. Foreign and domestic investment alike has risen as rights owners have become increasingly confident about their ability to protect their IP within China.  

As protection has increased, rights owners have turned to China’s top intellectual property practices to enforce their rights. It was this dynamic environment in which Asia IP’s editorial team has release our 202 China IP Awards, designed to recognize and honour the top IP firms and practices, including winners in practice specialties (such as pharma, biotech and life sciences) and by region. We’ve also named a national IP Firm of the Year, which will be revealed below.  

The decisions which follow were made by the Asia IP editorial team, based on feedback and recommendations received from in-house counsel, senior corporate executives and legal professionals from around the region and around the world, as well as submissions from law firms themselves. 

To determine the winning firms, we carefully evaluated each firm’s most important cases, portfolios and other notable work throughout in the past year, in conjunction with the recommendations and comments we received. 

We were pleasantly surprised by the quantity and quality of recommendations we received from those who know these IP practices the best. It is clear from the submissions we received that corporate counsel are keen observers of the firms doing work for them; they’re not afraid to praise those firms which do the best work – and they told us which firms aren’t deserving, too.  

It is clear, too, that law firms are in a fierce competition with each other to make the case that they are best-situated to serve their clients well. The work firms in China do has improved by leaps and bounds in recent years, and while it once would have been an easy job for us to name the top firms in each practice area, the heightened competition has made it quite challenging now. 

While firms in Beijing still command the majority of the intellectual property work in China, firms in other parts of the country are increasingly competitive with each other and with firms in Beijing. Thus, we included regional awards for firms in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, with Shanghai included as a nod to that region’s growing importance as a commercial and manufacturing hub, as well as its increasing strength in high-tech industries. Guangzhou is notable for its inclusion in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area collection of cities, provinces and special administrative regions in the Pearl River Delta area. 

And, finally, let us include a few housekeeping statements. Our China IP Awards recognize only domestic Chinese law firms. International firms will continue to be honoured in our China International IP Awards as part of our annual Asia IP Awards ceremony. Detailing the achievements of every single winner in this feature is not possible, so it is important to say that each winning firm in each category carries the same weight and has earned the award equally. Winning firms are presented here by alphabetical order in each category, and not in any other fashion. And finally, Asia IP wishes to congratulate each of our winners!

– GREGORY GLASS 

IP Firm of the Year 

 

IP Firm of the Year

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office

 

The winner of our 2023 China IP Awards IP Firm of the Year firm comes as no surprise: Beijing-based CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office takes the award home for the fourth consecutive year. The firm is the oldest and one of the largest full-service IP law firms in China, and it continues to provide strong results in both litigation and prosecution work. The firm’s history dates all the way back to January 1957, when a trademark agency was established within the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, a non-governmental trade promotion organization, to represent foreign companies before Chinese authorities. The agency was the sole trademark agency in China until the mid-1980s. The firm organized a patent agency in the early 1980s, when China began to establish its patent system. The patent agency was authorized as the first Chinese intellectual property law firm to have cross-border representation. In 1993, the two agencies merged to form the CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office. The firm, which boasts senior lawyers including president Chuanhong Long and vice presidents Zhongqi Zhou and Shaohui Yuan among its leadership, and some 322 patent and trademark attorneys and 96 qualified attorneys at law, is the recipient of many honours and awards, and was a clear winner in this category.  

Practice Area Awards 

Trademark Prosecution Firms of the Year 

Practice Area Awards
Trademark Prosecution
Beijing Gaowo IP Firm
Beijing Janlea Trademark Agency
CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office
Chang Tsi & Partners
Unitalen Attorneys at Law

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Trademark Prosecution Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: Beijing Gaowo IP Firm, Beijing Janlea Trademark Agency, CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office, Chang Tsi & Partners and Unitalen Attorneys at Law. 

Beijing Gaowo is regularly one of the top trademark filers in the country, with responsibility for more than 10,000 trademarks every year. The firm was established as an intellectual property agency in 2004; it now has a staff of more than 1,500, including more than 130 trademark and patent attorneys. Clients include Bentley, TMobile, China Mobile, Lenovo, SanLi, Kinghood Group and numerous universities. 

Beijing Janlea Trademark Agency has assisted McDonald’s in filing applications for “Golden Arches” in Chinese, DairyFarm in filing applications for Mannings and Café de Coral Assets for Café de Coral. It has also handled appeals for McDonald’s McCafe mark, and the Coca-Cola Company’s Fanta mark. The firm was established in 1995. In 2011, the firm reported that it had succeeded in having 49 of its clients’ marks recognized as well-known trademarks in China, including Sprite, Disney, Nestlé, Hu Tong and Dong Yi Ri Sheng. The firm has handled tens of thousands of cases for trademark registration. 

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office is the oldest and one of the largest full-service IP law firms in China, and it continues to provide strong results in litigation and prosecution. The firm has 292 patent and trademark attorneys, with 76 qualified attorneys-at-law. Trademark prosecution, as one of the firm’s strongest practice areas, has performed strongly in the past year, representing clients at home and abroad. The trademark team has particular strength in developing sophisticated trademark clearance, protection, enforcement and commercialization strategies for Chinese enterprises both in China and abroad. 

Chang Tsi & Partners experienced a strong 2021, handling 32,953 trademark cases, an increase of 32 percent over the previous year, including more than 10,000 new trademark applications. In an important case, the firm helped American Dairy Queen (ADQ) obtain well-known trademark recognition without being sued before the court; the case also cleared a disputed mark owned by Wuxi Zhengke Foods Science and Technology Co., which claimed that the disputed mark was created by themselves, and it is not a copy or imitation of ADQ’s prior marks – and that he has many cups being the disputed mark in stock, and thus refused to sell its trademark to ADQ. “We filed an invalidation against the disputed mark on ADQ’s behalf, and received the favourable decision from the CNIPA, wherein the in-charge examiner finally decided to declare the disputed mark as invalid based on our well-known claim,” a representative told Asia IP. 

Unitalen Attorneys at Law handled 39,059 cases, including opposition, invalidation, non-use cancelation and review in the past year. At the 2021 (5th) China Brand Bo’ao Summit in Hainan, the firm received the award for “China (Trade) Iconic Brand.” The firm has 700 attorneys, paralegals and law clerks working from its 21 branch offices and its Beijing headquarters. The firm is also active in areas ancillary to IP protection, including broadcasting, entertainment and sports law. 

Practice Area Awards 

Trademark Litigation Firms of the Year 

Practice Area Awards
Trademark Litigation
CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office
Chang Tsi & Partners
HFG Law & Intellectual Property
Kangxin Partners
NTD IP Attorneys

 

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Trademark Litigation Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office, Chang Tsi & Partners, HFG Law & Intellectual Property, Kangxin Partners and NTD IP Attorneys. 

 

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office advised Hastens Sangar in filing an invalidation against a similar mark registered by a Chinese individual in 2011 covering the goods “clothing and etc.” in Class 25. The cited marks of Hastens are the marks “” and “海丝腾” (hai si teng) covering the goods “fabric, textile materials and etc.” in Class 24 and the goods “bedroom furniture, mattress and etc.” in Class 20. The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) rejected the invalidation on the grounds that the disputed mark and the cited marks do not constitute similar marks used on similar goods, the evidence is insufficient to prove the cited marks were well-known before the filing date of the disputed mark, and the registration of the disputed mark does not infringe the prior trade name rights of Hastens. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court and Beijing High People’s Court maintained CNIPA’s decision. CCPIT and Hastens then brought the case to Supreme People’s Court, who overturned the judgments of the first and second instance, and CNIPA’s decision. The Supreme People’s Court acknowledged that the cited marks “” and “海丝腾” (hai si teng) bear strong distinctiveness and both the Latin and Chinese cited marks were used by Hastens before the filing date of the disputed mark. “In this case, the Supreme People’s Court did not strictly follow the Classification of Similar Goods and Services adopted by the CNIPA in the routine examination on trademark applications, and provided cross-class protection for prior trademark rights of Hastens on dissimilar goods,” a representative said. “The Supreme People’s Court explicitly stressed that when deciding whether the coexistence of marks of two parties would cause confusion, the degree of similarity between the marks, the distinctiveness and reputation of the cited marks, the features of and associations between the goods, the attention of relevant public, and the bad faith of the disputed party shall be given due consideration. This is another important breakthrough on the application of Article 30 of China Trademark Law, setting an example to courts of all levels to follow on determination of similar goods.” 

Chang Tsi & Partners advised Baidu Online Network Technology(Beijing) in its application for invalidation with CNIPA against trademark No. 7015260 "居尚百度及图" (the disputed trademark) registered by Beijing Baidu Building Decoration Engineering Anhui Co. 

In 2021, CNIPA issued a ruling on the request for invalidation of the trademark, ruling that the disputed trademark was upheld. On April 6, 2021, Baidu instructed the firm to file a lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, which found that the disputed trademark was a copy of Baidu's second well-known cited trademark (No. 1579950 "百度") and the registration and use of the disputed trademark violated paragraph 2 of Article 13 of the Trademark Law 2001, and therefore ruled that the sued ruling was revoked. Both the CNIPA and Baidu Construction Company appealed against the first instance judgment. The Beijing High People’s Court rejected the appeal and upheld the first instance judgement after review. 

HFG Law & Intellectual Property practices out of offices in Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin, offering contentious and non-contentious IP work with commercial and corporate law services. The firm advised Mary Kay, a purveyor of cosmetics, in a case against an infringing defendant which had been selling Mary Kay’s products through its online shop, with batch number and service QR codes which had been removed from the packages. The court ruled that the sale of the products with decoded batch numbers and service QR codes constituted unfair competition. “There is not an explicit stipulation about this decoding behavior in the current law and whether decoding products could constitute illegal behavior is unknown. Through comprehensive debate, finally the court held the decoding behavior had violated Article 2 of Anti-unfair Competition Law and belongs to ‘general unfair competition act’,” the firm told Asia IP. 

Kangxin Partners has eight offices across China, offering a range of IP services. The firm advised Ergo Chef in a series significant trademark administrative litigation cases against Guangdong Xinanya Trading Co. to prevent them from registering mark similar to the client’s unregistered trademark in Classes 7, 11 and 21. Ergo Chef has been designing and manufacturing kitchen knives, kitchen gadgets and accessories and, as far back as 2008, had business with Guangdong Xinanya. On October, 1, 2014, the client and Guangdong Xinanya reached a trademark license and distribution agreement, under which Guangdong Xinanya was the only distributor of the Ergo Chef brand. Then, the client noticed that Guangdong Xinanya applied for four of its marks in Classes 7, 11 and 21. Guangdong Xinanya also applied for other similar marks in other classes. Ergo Chef filed the trademark oppositions, invalidations as well as administrative litigations against them, and both the CNIPA and the court supported the Ergo Chef claim.  

NTD IP Attorneys was established in 1987 and was the first of the four earliest Chinese IP firms to provide IP services for foreign clients. Today, it has more than 500 professionals and support staff, icnlduing 189 patent attorneys, 63 trademark attorneys and 69 lawyers spread across three offices in Beijing, Shanghai and Hong Kong. The firm advised Conseil de l’Europe, a widely-recognized international intergovernmental organization founded in 1949 and headquartered in Strasbourg, France. In 1955, the emblem of a circle of 12 gold stars on a blue background was launched. In 1983, the European Parliament in turn adopted the star-studded flag devised by Conseil de l’Europe and recommended that it become the European Communities’ emblem. This emblem has since become synonymous with a shared political project which unites all Europeans, transcending their diversity. TD represented the client to oppose Chinese trademark No. 37660585 in Class 35, which consisted of 12 gold stars on a blue background with the letters EDB inside the circle of stars. CNIPA found that the device part of the opposed mark has slight differences with the emblem and flag of the opponent, the use and registration of such mark which is similar to the aforesaid official emblem should not be approvable without permission or authorization from the international intergovernmental organization Conseil de l’Europe based on Article 10.1.(3) of the Chinese Trademark Law, to avoid the likeness of any misidentification or misunderstanding among the public. 

Practice Area Awards 

Patent Prosecution Firms of the Year 

 

Practice Area Awards
Patent Prosecution
Advance China IP Law Office
Beijing Sanyou Intellectual Property Agency
CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office
Liu, Shen & Associates
Unitalen Attorneys at Law

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Patent Prosecution Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: Advance China IP Law Office; Beijing Sanyou Intellectual Property Agency; CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office; Liu, Shen & Associates; and Unitalen Attorneys at Law. 

Advance China IP Law Office advised Carl, Zeiss in a patent involving the Zeiss X-ray microscopy system. Zeiss has the first 3D X-ray microscopes (XRM) truly capable of non-destructive analysis for quantification of internal structural parameters at submicron to nanometer scale. X-ray computed tomography (CT) is often used for non-destructive inspection and analysis of the internal structure of samples. The use of polychromatic X-ray sources is often superior to monochromatic X-rays, but beam hardening (BH) processing is required, causing the tomographic reconstruction to often produce BH artifacts and errors in results. This invention is a spectrum measurement and estimation method for tomographic reconstruction, beam hardening correction, dual-energy CT and system diagnosis, etc., to solve the technical problem mentioned above and greatly reduce error and promote accuracy. The examiner believed that the key technical features of the invention had been disclosed in the prior art, and cited three prior art documents to reject all the claims. The firm’s attorneys obtained a patent grant with a claim scope as unchanged as possible based on precise technical understanding after two office actions and re-examination. In response to the two OAs, the firm made only minor changes to the independent Claim 1 respectively, and fully explained the technical differences with the prior art. The application was finally granted with just minor editing. 

Beijing Sanyou Intellectual Property Agency advised Liyang Weixin Biotechnology Co. at the Supreme People’s Court in an invalidation proceeding against Lin Yuan’s patents protection of a powder of α, α-trehalose dihydrate crystals (crystalline trehalose powder), and defines the core parameters such as crystallinity of the crystalline trehalose powder. Trehalose is a known product in prior art and is widely used in the food industry, pharmaceutical industry and cosmetics. Liyang Weixin Biotechnology Co. and other companies filed invalidation requests against the patent. After full search and careful planning of strategies, Sanyou team filed invalidation requests against the two patents involved in the case in September 2018. In the invalidation request, Sanyou team deeply analyzed the physical meaning of the parameters defined in the claim and the relationship between the physical meaning and the technical effect. On the relationship between crystallinity and solidity: in the patent concerned, the crystalline trehalose powder is defined by the user-defined physical parameter “crystallinity,” which is different from the common definition of crystallinity. Its physical meaning is actually the proportion of crystalline trehalose dihydrate in the crystalline trehalose powder. The Sanyou team used textbooks as evidence to prove that moisture absorption can lead to powder consolidation. That is, as common knowledge in the art, the consolidation of powder is usually caused by its hygroscopicity. It can be seen that the higher the crystallinity of crystalline trehalose powder, the higher the content of non-hygroscopic crystalline trehalose dihydrate, the lower the content of hygroscopic amorphous trehalose, and the less easy for the crystalline trehalose powder to consolidate. Therefore, those skilled in the art have known that there is a correlation between crystallinity and consolidation, and it is easy to conceive improving the consolidation of powder by adjusting crystallinity. The Sanyou team believed that the patent involved was not inventive. CN’PA supported Sanyou's grounds for invalidation and declared the related patent claims invalid. After many years of trials, the Supreme People's Court made final judgments on January 29, 2023, (2021) rejecting all claims of the patentee and maintaining the original ruling. 

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office handled a series of patent invalidation cases before CNIPA. Its client, Xylene, is the patentee of a number of standard essential patents in the video coding/decoding area. In 2021, a Chinese individual, Ce Guo, filed patent invalidation requests against a patent family including eight SEP patents of Xylene. The firm represented Xylene in the eight cases and won all of them. “We successfully challenged the date of disclosure of the evidence submitted by the petitioner,” a representative said. “As a result, only two out of four pieces of evidence were accepted by the examiners. In addition, the patents at issue relate to complicated video codec technology, which is difficult to understand for the examiners. We delved into the technology and illustrated to the examiners in a rather simple way to ensure their correct understanding on the patents, which was a key point of our success.” 

Liu, Shen & Associates advised Pfizer as CNIPA issued invalidation decisions respectively for two invalidation cases of patent of the Axitinib crystal, upholding the validity of claims related to the Axitinib marketed crystal. The Liu, Shen biomedical team assisted Pfizer in defending its rights successfully. The cases were represented by partner Zou Zongliang, partner Cao Lili and partner Liu Guojun to appear in court. Team members collected strong counter-evidence and formulated targeted strategies of response to the invalidation requests of different petitioners. It conducted in-depth and comprehensive discussions and analyses of the cases prior to the oral hearing, and the members worked closely together during the oral hearing to fight against more than 100 pieces and nearly 2,000 pages of evidence submitted by Petitioner A and nearly 20 pieces of evidence submitted by Petitioner B. 

Unitalen Attorneys at Law has a significant practice in all areas of patents, including patent prosecution, counseling, licensing, contracts, technology transfers and portfolio defense with financial transactions. The firm’s patent group has more than 180 attorneys representing both domestic and international preparation and prosecution of patent applications before the Chinese Patent Office and foreign patent offices. In 2021, the firm successfully dealt with more than 46,000 patent prosecution cases, including more than 33,000 invention patents. Unitalen ranked No.1 with 11,791 patents in 2020 on the list of Number of Authorized Patent Agents for Inventions jointly released by IPRdaily, a Chinese intellectual property industry publisher, and incoPat Innovation Index Research Center. Since the establishment of the China Patent Award, jointly awarded by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), patent applications handled by Unitalen have won many times.  

Practice Area Awards

Patent Litigation Firms of the Year 

 

Practice Area Awards
Patent Litigation
China Patent Agent (H.K.) 
King & Wood Mallesons
IP March
Liu, Shen & Associates
Unitalen Attorneys at Law

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Patent Prosecution Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: China Patent Agent (H.K.); IP March; King & Wood Mallesons; Liu, Shen & Associates; and Unitalen Attorneys at Law. 

China Patent Agent (H.K.) was established in Hong Kong in 1984 is considered one of three pioneering Chinese intellectual property agencies, providing comprehensive IP services to clients in China and abroad. The firm won in a patent contributory infringement lawsuit at the Beijing High People’s Court on behalf of a European client, Darwin Technology International, which holds a China patent on an air purifier (ZL00806175.0). The domestic competitor, Yujie, provided the filters used in the purifiers to Beijing Technology Co., which in turn installed the filters into the purifiers and put the same onto the market. The Beijing High People’s Court in its second instance judgment affirmed that the plaintiff met its burden of proof of Yujie’s knowledge of the ’175 patent and that the filters provided by Yujie are solely used for the infringing purifiers, i.e., having no substantial non-infringing uses, because of its special electrodes arrangements. The victory is worth noting because contributory infringement is rarely supported by the Chinese courts. Also, the test for establishing contributory infringement varies over time, especially during 2017-2021. 

IP March advised Fujian Anxi Xing’an Metal Co, which had been sued by Anxi Yiming Tea Machinery Co. The firm’s client was sued for invention patent infringement and royalty payment during the temporary protection period based on Chinese invention patent ZL201910882221.9. The firm made a thorough search and analysis on the validity of the patent and infringement risk of the accused infringing product and filed an invalidation request with CNIPA for cancelling the patent or narrowing its protection scope, and at the same time, a detailed non-infringement defence was also made and submitted with the court for consideration. Under detailed comparison and the firm’s arguments, the court finally decided that the accused infringing product did not fall into the protection scope of the patent and did not establish infringement. All the litigious claims of the plaintiff were rejected. 

King & Wood Mallesons advises on all areas of IP including copyright, domain name, dispute and enforcement, licensing and exploitation, trademark as well as patent. The firm’s clients include some of the most famous household brands in the world such as Nestlé and Colgate-Palmolive, and recent works include patent filing and prosecution for IBM and patent litigation efforts for ABB.  

Noted for its work in patent prosecution, Liu, Shen & Associates is recommended by clients for smooth interactions in terms of workflow management and expertise. Perry Yang, one of the firm’s founders, specializes in patent filing, prosecution and invalidation proceedings in the field of mechanical engineering. Yang has over 30 years of experience and comes highly recommended; past work includes representing a major international toy manufacturer and successfully having two of the client’s trademarks recognized by the court as well-known trademarks.  

Unitalen Attorneys at Law has a significant practice in all areas of patents, including patent prosecution, counseling, licensing, contracts, technology transfers and portfolio defense with financial transactions. The firm’s patent group has more than 180 attorneys representing both domestic and international preparation and prosecution of patent applications before the Chinese Patent Office and foreign patent offices. In 2021, the firm successfully dealt with more than 500 difficult patent litigation cases. The firm’s lawyers have extensive experience representing patentees and defending against patent infringement claims in patent litigation cases. 

Practice Area Awards 

Copyright Firms of the Year 

Practice Area Awards
Copyright
Co-effort Law Firm
East & Concord Partners
Lifang & Partners
Lung Tin Intellectual Property Agent
TransAsia Lawyers

 

The winners of the 2023 China IP Awards Copyright Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: Co-effort Law Firm, East & Concord Partners, Lifang & Partners, Lung Tin Intellectual Property Agent and TransAsia Lawyers. 

Lawyers at Co-Effort Law Firm have a long history of providing clients with non-litigation service concerning copyright protection, including 119 copyright registrations during 2021. Clients include the Shanghai Municipal Party Committee Propaganda Department, Shanghai Press and Publication Bureau, Shanghai Concert Hall, Shanghai Center of Chinese Operas, Shanda Games and Tencent. The firm represented Shengqu Games in series of cases of “Mir 2”. In December 2021, the Supreme People’s Court made a series of final judgments on the related rights and interests of Shengqu Games (formerly Shanda Games)’s IP of “Mir 2”. The court revised the first instance judgment made by the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court. The new judgment makes it clear that the renewal agreement on “Mir 2” signed by Shengqu Games and Actoz is legal and valid. Thus, an ownership dispute which lasted more than five years and is worth more than Rmb100 billion (US$15.4 billion) has finally been clarified. 

East & Concord Partners has a legal team with extensive experience which has successfully rendered legal services to domestic and foreign clients. The firm has aided numerous enterprises in acquiring their copyright, trademarks, logos, and patents for effective protection. The firm successfully represented the People’s Education Press Co., which introduced the Sino-Japan Exchange Standard Japanese from Mitsumura Tosho Publishing Co. in 1988 and reprinted in April 2005. Since its release, it has had a circulation of more than 5 million sets. The People’s Education Press Co. found that China Yuhang Publishing House Co. published and issued the teaching auxiliary materials of the Sino-Japan Exchange Standard Japanese without permission, and quoted a large number of original content in the teaching auxiliary materials. In this case, Bing Guan represented the People’s Education Press and engaged in all the work including evidence collection and litigation.  

Lifang & Partners is headquartered in Beijing with regional offices in Guangzhou, Wuhan, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Seoul. The firm has advised many top names in copyright matters, including American Superconductor in dispute with Sinovel for copyright infringement and unfair competition, Microsoft in computer software copyright infringement cases (since 2010) and Adobe and Autodesk in an action for computer copyright infringement against a large Chinese landscape and architecture design institute. 

In the last 12 months, the number of copyright cases handled by Lung Tin Intellectual Property Agent increased over the prior year. Most of the cases are copyright registrations of art works and registrations of computer software. The team also represented several clients to enforce their copyright in China against the third parties’ copy or imitation by sending C&D letters, filing complaints or filing civil litigations concerning copyright infringement. Typical cases include a series of copyright infringement and unfair competition dispute cases between Tencent and a short video platform, a comprehensive rights protection project for the dance performance of Only This Green by China Oriental Performing Arts Group Co., Ltd., and the alleged infringing case for which Sanofi used Hanyi fonts. The font case is a significant development in the field of copyright that using fonts can be accused of infringement. Numerous online shop operators and content entrepreneurs have been accused of infringement because of using other people's fonts, and therefore pay economic costs. This reflects, on one hand, that the relevant practitioners urgently need to strengthen their copyright awareness, on the other hand, that the font copyright industry regulation is chaotic and vague, with some font companies even resorting to “phishing marketing” to protect their rights. At the end of 2022, Lung Tin strategically introduced a practical expert with experience in nearly 10,000 copyright cases, which is an important plan to further enhance our service quality and influence in this field, in order to provide high quality legal service to our clients in such areas as digital publishing, digital music, NFT, pan-entertainment, etc. 

TransAsia Lawyers advise some of the most prominent global and Chinese tech, telecom, media, and consumer product companies on the IP implications of market-entry, regulatory, financing, M&A, and commercial matters in China and across the region. It also advises global and local publishers on copyright protection, anti-piracy work, license-driven China distribution and partnerships, copyright licensing packages, and contracting with domestic and overseas authors, producers and publishers for publishing and distribution, and TV and film adaptations. “Our work involves bespoke licensing advice on all such transactions, tailored to the unique needs of the content owner and the format of the intended product,” a representative told Asia IP. “In the film and art sector, we have recently been advising a well-known director on IP acquisition and literary property negotiations. We also help clients such as Usborne, Blizzard, Valve, and CFG with commercial and IP disputes. We also continue to advise top artists, art fairs and institutions on IP planning and project collaboration with art media, artwork licensing, derivative works and merchandising.” In the music sector, as China counsel the firm advises UMG as well as other labels, artists, talent agencies, and libraries, providing essential advice on structuring, compliance, negotiations, and other deal-critical issues for these IP-dependent sectors.  

Practice Area Awards

Enforcement Firms of the Year 

Practice Area Awards
Enforcement
IP Leader Attorneys-at-Law
Lung Tin Intellectual Property Agent
Lusheng Law Firm
IntellecPro IP Agency
Unitalen Attorneys at Law

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Enforcement Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: IntellecPro IP Agency, IP Leader Attorneys-at-Law, Lung Ting Intellectual Property Agent, Lusheng Law Firm and Unitalen Attorneys at Law.  

IntellecPro IP Agency has advised Capitaland, a Singapore-based real estate developer which operates a chain of shopping centres under the brand name “Raffles City” (来福士). The firm has assisted the client to obtain well-known mark protection in oppositions, invalidations and administrative enforcement actions in past years. In a recent case, a Chinese company, Tianjin Arbos Technology Group Co. registered the mark “莱福士” under No. 23759476 in Class 33 on rum, wine, vodka, etc. The firm filed an invalidation against the mark on June 7, 2021, arguing that the mark is an imitation of the client’s well-known mark “来福士广场 RAFFLES CITY & Device” under No. 3493720 in Class 36 on real estate management and leasing of real estate, and violates Article 13.2 of the PRC Trademark Law. CNIPA ruled on April 29, 2022, to invalidate the disputed mark on the ground that the mark is an imitation of the client’s well- known mark. “We have helped the client to gain well-known mark protection in a number of cases, but not in all cases. Where the disputed marks are designated on goods/services unrelated to the real-estate services and there is a lack of evidence establishing the adverse party’s bad faith, CNIPA has hesitated to grant well-known mark protection. The present case is an exceptional victory. On the one hand, there is little connection between Class-33 goods and real-estate services. On the other hand, Arbos Tech is a large manufacturer of agricultural equipment and auto parts, and there is no clear evidence showing the company’s bad faith in filing the disputed mark,” a representative said. 

IP Leader Attorneys-at-Law undertook 21 different enforcement cases in 2021 with successful results, as well as 100 litigation cases, including 90 civil cases and 10 criminal cases. The Qingdao-based firm has offices in the heart of city’s Laoshan financial district as well as the Qingdao Research and Innovation Center in the China Electronics Optics Valley. 

Lung Ting Intellectual Property Agent advised Xiamen Huadian Switchgear Co., a joint venture specializing in the production of medium-voltage switches, circuit breakers and related accessories. Since its establishment, the company has developed rapidly, and its products can be widely used in power system, industry, construction industry and various infrastructure projects. The famous Xi’an High Voltage Apparatus Research Institute is one of the shareholders of Xiamen Huadian, which was founded in 1958. It is one of the research institutes with high reputation in the high voltage apparatus technology industry at home and abroad, and also the second largest high voltage apparatus inspection center in the world. The Institute is also responsible for the inspection and evaluation of all imported and exported high-voltage electrical appliances on behalf of the Chinese government. Lung Tin has handled a series of intellectual property rights protection complaints on behalf of the client, which have had a far-reaching impact on the domestic high-voltage electrical equipment manufacturing industry. 

Lusheng Law Firm provides clients with a wide range of enforcement options, including evidence collection and notarization, administrative/criminal enforcement, trade fair enforcement, administrative damages claims and sending C&D letters and negotiation. The firm successfully cooperated with the Shantou Copyright Bureau in raiding a factory for infringing a client’s copyright of a type of toy ball. The case reached the criminal threshold and the firm successfully persuaded the Copyright Bureau to transfer the case to the police for criminal investigation. To achieve the best deterrent effect, it also filed civil litigation against the factory seeking compensation; the defendant paid reasonable damages and the civil case was settled. In another enforcement matter, a large OEM factory has produced in large quantities knock-off brand mobile phone holders and exported them to the United States, infringing its client’s invention patent. “We successfully identified the container number of one shipment and worked with Shenzhen customs and detained the shipment worth about US$100,000 of infringing products,” a representative said. “We filed civil litigation against the exporting company and the factory in Shenzhen Intermediate Court and applied for evidence and asset preservation. The case is now ongoing.” 

Unitalen Attorneys at Law houses a large number of attorneys, paralegals and clerks to serve clients from its Beijing headquarters and 22 other offices in China including Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong. With additional offices in Tokyo, Munich and San Francisco, Unitalen represents a diverse range of clients from startups to Fortune 500 companies such as Tencent.  

Specialization Awards

Licensing & Franchising Firms of the Year 

Specialization Awards
Licensing & Franchising
CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office
Chang Tsi & Partners
China Patent Agent (H.K.)
Global Law Office
NTD IP Attorneys

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Licensing & Franchising Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office, Chang Tsi & Partners, China Patent Agent (H.K.), Global Law Office and NTD IP Attorneys.

Global Law Office recently advised Chunhua Capital on its acquisition of Mead Johnson’s China business (a transaction valued at up to Rmb14 billion (US$2.15 billion)), including IP due diligence and facilitating the acquisition of the relevant IP rights of the Mead Johnson brand from Reckitt Benckiser Group by Chunhua Capital. Mead Johnson is a leading manufacturer of infant formula globally with its flagship product Enfamil. The firm is headquartered in Beijing, with branches in Shanghai, Shenzhen and Chengdu.  

Specialization Awards 

Technology, Media & Telecoms Firms of the Year 

 

Specialization Awards
Technology, Media & Telecoms
Beijing Uni-intel Patent and Trademark Law Firm
Global Law Office
Jingtian & Gongcheng
NTD IP Attorneys
TransAsia Lawyers

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Technology, Media & Telecoms Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: Beijing Uni-intel Patent and Trademark Law Firm, Global Law Office, Jingtian & Gongcheng, NTD IP Attorneys and TransAsia Lawyers. 

In the past 12 months, Beijing Uni-intel Patent and Trademark Law Firm handled more than 400 patent drafting and filing projects for Huawei, a top company in China, around 400 patent drafting and filing projects for Tianma, one of the top cellphone screen manufacturers in China, around 300 patent drafting and filing projects for Unisoc, which is one of the top chip manufactures in China, around 200 patent drafting and filing projects for China Mobile, which is the top telecommunication company in China, around 250 patent drafting and filing projects for Honor, which is one of main players in cellphone industry, and around 110 patent drafting and filing projects for Jinko Solar, which is now one of main players in photovoltaic industry. Among the above filing numbers, around 600 patent applications in total are overseas filings to the United States, the EPO, Japan, South Korea and other such offices. 

Founded in the early 1990s, Jingtian & Gongchen is one of the first private, independent law partnerships in China. The full-service firm handles all manner of IP, cybersecurity, TMT, sports and entertainment and arts work, as well as capital and commercial work. The firm has advised on completed patent and IP disputes, particularly in the telecommunications, semiconductors, computers, consumer electronics and internet sectors, as well as disputes concerning standard-essential patents. Jingtian represents Guangdong OPPO Electronics Industry Co., one of the top smart terminal manufacturers in China, in its FRAND lawsuit with SHARP Corporation. The patent involved is a WiFi SEP owned by SHARP. This case involves parallel litigation between China and outside the territory. For the first time, the Chinese court has made it clear that it has the right to determine the global rate of standard essential patent portfolios. The outcome of this case may affect the FRAND negotiations between the licensors and licensees of the relevant industries.  

Specialization Awards 

Pharma, Biotech & Life Sciences Firms of the Year 

Specialization Awards
Pharma, Biotech & Life Sciences
AFD China Intellectual Property Law Office
HengDu Law Firm
IP March
Lung Tin IP Attorneys
Peksung Intellectual Property

 

The winners of our 2023 China IP Awards Pharma, Biotech & Life Sciences Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order: AFD China Intellectual Property Law Office, HengDu Law Firm, IP March, Lung Tin IP Attorneys and Peksung Intellectual Property.  

AFD China Intellectual Property Law Office is a full-service IP firm that is ranked a top tier firm by the Beijing IP Office, has been a top 10 PCT filer in China since 2009 (and has been top 20 in the world since 2011), and has three times been named a leading agency by the Beijing Patent Attorneys Association with the recognition of providing comprehensive, spot-on and one-stop services. The firm, in representing a client in litigation against the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA), eventually secured a domestic priority in China of a patent of the client’s, which may result in improved understanding of domestic priority and related procedures across the industry. The case was eventually heard by the Supreme People’s Court. 

HengDu Law Firm, a full-service firm based in Beijing, serves clients in 47 different practice areas, but perhaps top among them is its patent practice. Clients include Sinochem Fertilizer, the information centre of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, and others. Founder of the firm Jiang Fengtao is noted for his work in pharmaceuticals, food and beverage and several other areas. He represented Guangzhou Wanglaoji Pharmaceutical Co. against Guangdong Jaiduobao Drink & Food Co. to identify part of Jiaduobao’s advertising as misleading.   

Peksung Intellectual Property offers a full spectrum of premium intellectual property services that cover all facets of IP law, including patents, trademarks, designs, copyright, trade secrets, licensing, technology transfer, enforcement, anti-counterfeiting and others for domestic and overseas clients. The firm has handled patent prosecution matters for Bayer in pharma and biotech areas, for AbbVie in pharma and for Oxford Nanopore in biotech. Jiancheng Jiang, one of the founders of Peksung, is a vice president of the All-China Patent Agents Association.  

Regional Firms of the Year 

Regional Awards
Beijing
Unitalen Attorneys at Law

 

Regional Awards
Shanghai
HFG Law & Intellectual Property

 

Regional Awards
Guangzhou
Advance China IP Law Office

 

The winners of our 2023 regional China IP Awards Firms of the Year are, in alphabetical order by city: Beijing-Unitalen Attorneys at Law, Shanghai–HFG Law & Intellectual Property and Guangzhou–Advance China IP Law Office. 


Law firms