The Operation of Intellectual Property Court in Tai Wan
In May 24h 2015 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Research Center for Intangible Assets Management in China University of Political Science and Law (short for RCIAM) hosted the 23rd academic salon session in A1013 Scientific Research Building, XueYuan Campus, CUPL. This salon invited Presiding judge HuiRu Cai of IP Court of Tai Wan as main lecturer. Prof. XiaoQing Feng, the he Director of Institute of Intellectual Property and Research Center of Intangible Assets Management, hosted this salon. The thesis of salon was “The Operation of Intellectual Property Court in Tai Wan.”
Prof. Feng firstly introduced the main lecturer and thesis of lecture to all students. He explained that the IP Court of Tai Wan was founded in 2008, had the jurisdiction over civil, administrative, and criminal cases concerning intellectual property issues. The IP Court made several innovative features, including the trial design, the choice of technology investigator, the relationship between civil procedure and administrative procedure. China had founded Intellectual Property Courts in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou in 2014, which marked the new trial system for intellectual property dispute in the country. Under the circumstances, this salon and lecture introduced the operation and development of IP Courts in Tai Wan so as to provide a sample and suggestion to intellectual property protection in our country.
Following the introduction, Judge Cai began her lecture. She divided the entire lecture thorough three main sections: “the establishment of IP Court”, “the Characteristics of Tai Wan Intellectual Property”, “retrospect and reform”. Based on the division, she made a logical, profound, and deep-level lecture. She answered specific questions from students during the lecture. First of all, she briefly described the legal system of intellectual property in Tai Wan in order to clarify the general background for students. The she explained the location, founded basis, operating features, organization, and staffs of the Intellectual Property Courts in Tai Wan. Her vivid description display the entire IP Court in front of all students.
During the lecture, two lecturers and students focused on the issue of “technology examination agent” for a heated discussion. Judge Cai pointed out the agent was assistant to the judge, and the agent merely receive counseling and advice. Neither could he make determination nor provide testimony. The agent should assist the judge to make decision thorough his specialized knowledge and technology. Note that the agent only provide assistance when “technology issue” was in question, not the “legal issue”. Some students also discussed whether the “technology examination agent” replaced the “expert counseling” and thus wasted the judicial resources.
The salon went into discussion stage after the main lecture. Students actively asked question to two professors on the distinction of judicial system between mainland and Tai Wan in a heartily atmosphere. The professors answered questions with patience, and students receive substantial benefits in this salon. The salon finally reached a great success and ended with enthusiastic applauds from all participants.
