Jump to content
Revisiting China's Competition Law and Its Interaction with Intellectual Property Rights / IV. China’s 2017 IP Guidelines
Revisiting China's Competition Law and Its Interaction with Intellectual Property Rights / IV. China’s 2017 IP Guidelines
Contents
Chapter
Expand
|
Collapse
Page
1–14
Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
1–14
Details
15–24
I. Introduction: China’s Successful Journey Toward A Modern Judicial System
15–24
Details
A. China’s Socio-Economic Progress
Details
B. Origins of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law
Details
C. Origins of China’s Patent Law
Details
D. Interaction between Competition Policy and Intellectual Property Law
Details
1. Coherent goals of the two systems
Details
2. Possible conflicts between the two systems
Details
E. Main Themes Covered in This Thesis
Details
25–35
II. China’s Anti-Monopoly Law – A Reflection of the Successful Transition from a Centrally-Planned to a Market Economy
25–35
Details
A. Important Milestones
Details
B. China’s Competition Regime Prior to the AML
Details
1. The Anti-Unfair Competition Law of 1993
Details
2. The Price Law of 1997
Details
C. The Anti-Monopoly Law Comes into Force
Details
D. Institutional Design of Competition Agencies under the AML
Details
1. Administrative enforcement agencies
Details
2. Judicial enforcement
Details
E. Future Challenges
Details
36–46
III. EU Competition Policy – Main Reference for China’s Anti-Monopoly Law
36–46
Details
A. Background Information
Details
B. Why the US Competition Law Did Not Serve As the Main Model?
Details
C. Comparison Between EU and Chinese Competition Regimes
Details
1. Multiple goals
Details
2. Institutional design and enforcement
Details
2.1. Significance of administrative route for both jurisdictions
Details
2.2. Growing importance of private actions in both jurisdictions
Details
3. Legal framework and comparison of stipulations
Details
D. Dynamics of Competition Policy
Details
47–58
IV. China’s 2017 IP Guidelines
47–58
Details
A. China at the Crossroads between Competition Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights
Details
B. Characteristics and Main Principles of the IP Guidelines
Details
1. Principles of analysis – Art. 1
Details
2. Safe harbour principle – Art. 12
Details
3. Refusal to license IPRs – Art. 15
Details
3.1 The essential facility doctrine adopted by SAIC
Details
3.2 The essential facility doctrine from the US perspective
Details
3.3 The essential facility doctrine under the EU law
Details
3.4 Compulsory license under TRIPs Agreement
Details
3.5 Inevitable legal uncertainty of the essential facility doctrine
Details
4. SEP licensing
Details
C. Some Concluding Remarks
Details
59–72
V. Competition Policy and IPRs: Well-Functioning Symbiosis – A Case Study
59–72
Details
A. Brief Introduction to SEP and Related Issues
Details
B. Judicial Decision on Huawei v. InterDigital
Details
1. Case outline
Details
2. Substantial rulings of the Chinese courts
Details
2.1 IDC holds a dominant position
Details
2.2 Abuse of dominant position in licensing SEP technology
Details
3. Comments on main findings of the Chinese courts
Details
3.1 Definition of market dominance by Guangdong High Court
Details
3.2 Abuse of dominant position
Details
3.3 Chinese court sets the royalty rate
Details
3.4 SEP-related controversies
Details
C. Possible Ways Ahead
Details
73–74
VI. Conclusions
73–74
Details
75–80
List of Works Cited
75–80
Details
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
CC-BY
Access
Revisiting China's Competition Law and Its Interaction with Intellectual Property Rights , page 47 - 58
IV. China’s 2017 IP Guidelines
Autoren
Guangjie Li
DOI
doi.org/10.5771/9783845292687-47
ISBN print: 978-3-8487-5018-4
ISBN online: 978-3-8452-9268-7
Chapter Preview
Chapter Preview
Share
Current chapter
Complete document
Download citation
RIS
BibTeX
Copy DOI link
doi.org/10.5771/9783845292687-47
Share by email
Video schließen
Share by email Nomos eLibrary
Recipient*
Sender*
Message*
Your name
Send message
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.
