In Mar. 24h 2015, The Institute of Intellectual Property under Civil, Commercial, and Economic Law Department in China University of Political Science and Law (short for IIPL & CCEL) hosted the second academic salon session in Scientific Research Building, XueYuan Campus, CUPL.
Director and Prof. XiaoQing Feng of Institute of Intellectual Property hosted this academic salon. Associate Prof. and PHD Jian Chen made terrific research report on Intellectual Property Damages Remedy. Many master and doctorate students in IP major attended this salon.
First of all, Prof. Chen made argument that “the damages remedy system is generally transplanted from civil law, hence whether such kind of transplant is appropriate deserve further examination and discussion; or, such transplant brings about counterproductive effects.” To clarify these issues, Prof. Chen first made clear distinction between tangible assets and intangible assets. He argued that damages to IP in fact harmed the market advantages and position of right holders. Additionally, IP infringement also involves several issues such as IP products did not bear actual losses or counterproductive effects, IP infringement may bring about benefits to right holders, damages remedy may overcompensate the right holders. All the above issues should be distinguished from traditional civil law issues.
After the initial analysis, Prof. Chen introduced current status of intellectual property damages remedy in China. Prof. XiXin Liu indicated the current damages remedy system 1.inappropriately mixed the actual losses with illegal profits; 2. The measurement of actual losses or illegal profits were difficult to prove. As a result, Prof. Chen proposed his suggestion: established the damages assessing system and improved the cause-and-effect principle in order to solve the above problems. He also mentioned that the amount of damages currently were determined by judges without rationality. Therefore, the introduction of assessing lawyers is part of the establishment of damages assessing system. Meanwhile, the major issue under the cause-and-effect principle did not lie in what kind of principle could fully protect copyright holders because neither kind of principle could be eventually implemented. The focal point lied in fully consider different elements so as to exactly measure the damages.
After the excellent report by Prof. Chen, Prof. Feng made several arguments and comments. He argued that Prof. Chen’s report included couples of innovative insights: 1. Clarify the distinction between the IP infringement and infringement in tangible property when we conduct IP research; 2. Prof. Chen mentioned three kinds of IP infringement, whether commercial fame fell within the concept of intellectual property, a right or not, a damage or not, whether there was damages to commercial fame deserve further discussion; 3. We should improve the IP protection due to the weak protection by our nation.
The academic salon then went into the heated discussion stage. All master and PHD students proposed different arguments and innovative ideas with respect to IP damages remedy in a heartily atmosphere.
This salon not only brought about new enlightenment to students, but new questions. It extended the horizon and thoughts of students and offered the possibility of deep-level research. The salon finally reached a great success and ended with enthusiastic applauds from all participants.
