Intellectual Property Newsletter by MeritsIP, September 05, 2025

Intellectual Property Newsletter by MeritsIP, September 05, 2025

September 5, 2025 global, meritsip 0 Comments

Editor’s Note: Intellectual Property Highlights and Strategies for Innovation

Welcome to the MeritsIP Newsletter. We delve into critical updates in the intellectual property landscape, providing insights and strategies to help you navigate the ever-evolving world of patents, trademarks, and copyrights. Read on to stay informed and ahead in the game of innovation.

China Leads the World in Granted Nanotechnology Patents

On August 31, the Nanotechnology Industry Forum in Beijing released the “China Nanotechnology Industry White Paper (2025)”. From 2000 – 2025, globally, over 1.078 million nanotech patents were granted, with China holding 464,000 (43%), ranking first. By 2025, the global nanomarket may reach $1.5 trillion, with a 17%+ compound growth rate from 2018 – 2025. China’s patent transfer and licensing rate exceeds 8%.

This forum is a key satellite event of ChinaNANO2025. Academician Bai Chunli said nanotech is vital for strategic sectors and new – quality productivity. China is a major contributor to global nanoscience and a leader in the industry. AI is transforming nanotech. China will enhance basic research, application – orientation, and international cooperation.

ChinaNANO2025, founded in 2005 and held biennially, had 7 top international scientists give keynote speeches and over 600 scholars present on 15 hot topics, presenting the latest nanoscience research.

Inner Mongolia’s Patent Pre – examination Receipts Exceed 10,000

Recently, the Intellectual Property Protection Center of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region reported that in August this year, its patent pre – examination receipts exceeded 10,000, indicating a new phase in Inner Mongolia’s intellectual property protection and tech – innovation services. Since the service’s launch, it has served Inner Mongolia’s biology and new materials industries. The acceptance volume has grown annually, with an expanding service scale and a strengthened quality – first concept. The center issued documents to ensure pre – examination quality and avoid non – normal and low – quality applications. It also drafted norms for local innovation entities. As a public – welfare institution, it uses the “one – enterprise, one – strategy, one – combination” model. Focusing on 20 key enterprises, it addresses enterprise innovation issues from multiple aspects like patent writing and layout.

Supreme People’s Court Releases First Batch of Guiding Cases on Judicial Protection of Data Rights

On August 28, the Supreme People’s Court issued the 47th batch of guiding cases to standardize data – related case adjudication. This first – ever release on data rights protection includes six cases (two on unfair competition), covering data ownership determination and data product utilization.

Case 1: Beijing Weimou Company sued Beijing Chuangmou Company for unfair competition over unauthorized data transfer of short – videos on their respective apps. The Haidian Court and Beijing Intellectual Property Court ordered Chuangmou to pay 5 million yuan in compensation, as Weimou’s data collection had economic value. Starting from October 15, 2025, the revised Anti – Unfair Competition Law will apply.

Case 2: Jing Network Company sued Cheng Information Company for unfair competition over resume data. The Yangpu Court and Shanghai Intellectual Property Court dismissed the claim, ruling that Cheng’s associated account service, based on user authorization, didn’t disrupt the market or harm rights, so it didn’t constitute unfair competition.

New Obligations for E-commerce Platforms! Shanghai Issues Several Opinions on E-commerce Intellectual Property Protection

Recently, three Shanghai departments issued the “Several Opinions on E-commerce Intellectual Property Protection in Shanghai”, effective September 15, 2025. In 2021, a trial version was released. The Shanghai Intellectual Property Administration led the evaluation before its expiration. The new opinions are revised according to new IP protection situations, national requirements, and local realities. Based on a 2021 national standard, the new opinions add management requirements for the IP department to promote the standard’s implementation, guiding operators to standardize IP management. They also require e-commerce platform operators to ask in – platform publication sellers for qualification certificates. Moreover, to strengthen platform responsibilities, e-commerce platforms must fulfill review obligations and take measures against known or should – be – known infringements.

Unauthorized Sale of Virtual Digital Human Models? It’s an Infringement!

As virtual digital human technology gains wide – spread use, related intellectual property disputes have arisen. The Beijing Internet Court recently concluded a virtual digital human image infringement case. The original virtual digital human images were deemed works of fine art and protected by copyright law. Defendant Sun sold the models of the involved virtual digital humans without permission, infringing on the information network dissemination rights of Ju and Yuan companies, and was ordered to compensate 15,000 yuan.

Virtual digital humans A and B were jointly produced by four units including Ju and Yuan. After leaving the company, Sun sold their models on a website. The two companies sued Sun and the website operator Xixi Company for 1 million yuan. Sun claimed the models were not similar and the evidence was tampered with, while Xixi Company said it took measures to prevent infringement and was unaware of it.

The court found that the full – body image of A and the head image of B were works of fine art, and Sun’s models were substantially similar to the originals. Xixi Company was not held jointly liable. The judge emphasized that clarifying the legal attributes of virtual digital humans is crucial for industry development, and rights and interests should be defined through contracts.

Sonos Patent Reversal: Google’s Delayed Defense Restricted, Sonos Gains Negotiating Leverage

The six – year patent battle between Sonos and Google has covered key aspects of the smart audio industry chain. On August 28, 2025, the Federal Circuit Court overturned the California District Court’s decision on “prosecution laches”, allowing Sonos’ core patents to be enforced again. The court emphasized a higher threshold for establishing prosecution laches. This boosts Sonos’ position in litigation and negotiations, as it hopes to push Google for fair licensing talks. Google, having lost the prosecution laches defense, faces increased pressure. This long – term war shows the high cost of patent litigation and that for SMEs, confirmed core patents can reverse the situation. Patents can be a powerful negotiating tool. Companies planning overseas expansion should build patent portfolios during R & D, use patents for negotiation, and be familiar with different judicial procedures.

Patent Evaluation Report’s “Negative Conclusion” No Longer a Barrier for Infringement Lawsuits: Supreme Court’s 2025 Judicial Interpretation Redefines Rights – Protection Path

In July 2025, the Supreme People’s Court issued a judicial interpretation (Fa Shi [2025] No. 11), clarifying the legal status of the patent evaluation report and giving it general binding force. As of August 1, 2025, the report is merely a reference for judging patent validity, not a prerequisite for filing or accepting a lawsuit. When the report indicates the involved patent doesn’t meet the patent – granting conditions, the court should make a judgment based on the specific case rather than simply dismissing the lawsuit.

The patent evaluation report system, established by the CNIPA to address the stability of utility model and design patents, is often misinterpreted. It is just a technical opinion with lower legal force than judicial judgments or administrative rulings. It is neither an administrative decision nor a judicial judgment, and the requester can apply for correction within two months if they think it’s wrong.

The submission of the report is non – mandatory. The Supreme People’s Court emphasizes the court’s discretion in cases where the patentee doesn’t submit it. The report has significant reference value, though its conclusion is not legally binding, and patent holders should prepare well to reduce the risk of a negative report.

Supreme People’s Court Intellectual Property Tribunal: Selection of Compensation Methods for Infringement of Invention Patents

This news reports a patent – infringement dispute involving multiple companies. The court ruled that when key facts for calculating infringement compensation, like sales volume and unit price of infringing products, are clear, and other data can be determined from case evidence, the court should calculate compensation based on the right – holder’s actual losses or the infringer’s benefits, even if the patentee agrees to statutory compensation. The Changsha Intermediate People’s Court ordered relevant defendants to stop infringing acts and pay 1 million yuan in compensation. The Supreme People’s Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment on July 21, 2025.

USPTO Enhances Assignment Records Search Process

On August 27, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) integrated two traditional search systems (Patent Assignment Search System and Web Assignment System) to launch a new assignment search system. It will be officially launched on September 27, 2025, and the old systems will stop service. The new system offers a more reliable, secure, and user – friendly platform with detailed and reliable search results for patent and trademark assignment information. Users can do basic searches and optimize conditions via the “Advanced Search” bar. Its main functions are status tracking (check application status on the assignment center homepage by logging into Uspto.gov accounts), an intuitive user interface, the ability to save and resume searches, and a copy function to avoid repeated input of submitted information.

Escort the “Trademark Brand Festival”: Taiyuan, Shanxi Checks Market Price Order

The 15th China International Trademark Brand Festival will take place at the Taiyuan Jinyang Lake International Convention and Exhibition Center from September 5th to 8th. To ensure a fair and harmonious market during the event, the Taiyuan Market Supervision and Administration Bureau has organized a city – wide inspection of market price order around festival – related areas like catering, accommodation, etc. The bureau’s price supervision team visited key business units in Xiaodian and Wanbailin Districts. The inspection focused on the implementation of the clearly – marked price system and price – related illegal acts. Overall, the situation was good, but for some operators with issues such as misaligned price tags, the team provided on – site guidance and ordered rectification. The inspection team stressed that businesses should standardize pricing, maintain Taiyuan’s image, and fulfill their social responsibilities.

Beijing Fengtai: Focus on Checking Trademark Infringement

Recently, the Market Supervision and Administration Bureau of Fengtai District in Beijing launched a special campaign to crack down on the production and sale of trademark – infringing liquor. Law – enforcement officers targeted liquor specialty stores, supermarkets, tobacco and alcohol grocery stores, and catering outlets. They inspected the goods’ purchase channels, purchase vouchers, and sales records, focusing on checking for acts of selling liquor that infringed on the exclusive rights of registered trademarks. The authorities also urged merchants to operate legally and with integrity.

Japan Patent Office Announces Key Points of 2026 Intellectual Property Budget

On August 29, 2025, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) announced its 2026 intellectual property budget plan of 160.8 billion yen, a 6.2 – billion – yen increase from the previous year with a 2.4 – billion – yen annual revenue – expenditure increase. With the growing significance of intangible assets, strategic use of intellectual property in management is vital for innovation and profitability. In 2026, the JPO aims to offer the world’s fastest and highest – quality examinations, utilize generative AI, provide customized support for innovators, and help SMEs via regional networks while promoting IP to solve social problems.

The budget is divided into: 1. Ensuring the world’s fastest and highest – quality examination system (69.64 billion yen): Budget for prior art and trademark searches, using generative AI for patent searches, and system operation and updates. 2. Supporting IP utilization for innovation and operational capabilities (5.37 billion yen) and INPIT subsidies (12.2 billion yen): Strengthening support for IP utilization, expanding the IP ecosystem for regional SMEs through one – stop support and information dissemination.

North Korea’s Patent Invalidation System

This article systematically analyzes North Korea’s patent invalidation system using the 2017 – revised “Law on Inventions” and practical info. It has state – led features, different from China and Mongolia.

The legal basis is the 2017 – revised “Law on Inventions of the DPRK”. The State Invention Bureau (SIB) manages it, and its Invention Examination Committee handles invalidation review. It uses an administrative single – track system with state intervention and no judicial relief. SIB can start invalidation for “important national technologies”.

Invalidation can be requested by interested parties or state agencies. Korean – language evidence is needed, and overseas documents require embassy certification. The average review period is 8 – 12 months. For “state – secret” patents, the process is confidential. The official fee is $200 – 500, but translation and certification are costly.

When preparing evidence, local North Korean public evidence is recommended. Foreign enterprises must use local agencies. Military or nuclear – related patents are ineligible for invalidation. For agricultural and medical patents, local promotion materials are key evidence.

The system has issues like non – disclosure of standards and lack of international cooperation. A 2023 draft proposed third – party evaluation. Enterprises should do local literature searches before patent layout, and holders can submit tech certification letters for stability.

About Us

MeritsIP: Your Global Intellectual Property Partner

At MeritsIP, we provide comprehensive IP services in biomedicine, medical devices, manufacturing, semiconductors, and AI. We support 200+ top clients globally with strategic, high-quality IP services.

MeritsIP

MeritsIP