On October 16, 2021, as I contemplated lessons from my nine years in China, the Financial Times broke a story that rocked the world—especially the U.S. military: “China tests new space capability with hypersonic missile.” China’s recent launch of a nuclear-capable rocket that circled the globe at high speed “took US intelligence by surprise.” Military experts quickly noticed that Chinese innovation in hypersonic weapons “was far more advanced than US officials realised.” As I’ve seen happen many times in coverage on innovation in China, our mainstream media is now downplaying China’s achievement (“not much of a surprise,” per the New York Times, and nothing but old Russian technology per Foreign Policy). It’s similar to the objections raised for decades about IP and innovation in China: low quality, just copying, nothing to be worried about. Yet in industry after industry, China is taking a leadership position in technology and its international patents that can’t be won by copying. It comes from leading.

Downplaying Chinese innovation may make the West feel more secure, but it is a security based on illusion. Whether one likes China or not, its leadership role in innovation and IP cannot be wisely ignored, as we should learn from their hypersonic missile surprise, and surprises in hundreds of fields ranging from nanotech to paper straws.

My nine years in China taught me that China is serious about innovation and serious about leading in many areas. As I learned in many experiences, the capabilities of Chinese engineers, scientists, programmers, manufacturers, architects, designers, physicians, artists, financiers, and entrepreneurs can far exceed what the West thinks it knows about China. China’s accomplishments happening before our eyes or above our skies can catch us off guard,  whether they are in technical fields like biotech, green energy, transportation such as high-speed rail, solar power, mining technology, or nanomaterials, or in the realm of intellectual property (IP) and innovation itself, or in business strategy, political strategy, and numerous other areas. How did this happen? What changed in an impoverished, hungry nation to defy all expectations?

Part of the answer might be found in the heroic defiance of a few desperate farmers in the small village of Xiaogang who helped transform China. Their story teaches us old lessons about property rights and economic liberty that we may need to reconsider for our own future. Xi Jinping visited that village in 2016 and declared, “The daring feat we did at the risk of our lives in those days has become a thunder arousing China’s reform, and a symbol of China’s reform.” I believe you cannot understand China’s journey from poverty to leading the world in IP without knowing this rarely told story.

My Road from Shanghai to Xiaogang

My wife and I began our adventure in China in 2011 when I joined Asia Pulp and Paper as Head of Intellectual Property for what was supposed to be a one-year assignment in Shanghai, followed by a return to be part of North American operations. Fortunately, it became a much longer stay in a beautiful country and the most exciting city I’ve lived in. I wondered how Shanghai and much of China could be so prosperous, free of the economic problems of Cuba, Russia, the former East Germany, North Korea, and other lands that had embraced Marxist-Leninist ideology. Obviously, the economic reforms launched by Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s and 1980s had succeeded, but there was a backstory that touched me deeply when I learned of it. It would lead my wife and I to make a pilgrimage to an obscure little village in Anhui Province.

My first hint of the Xiaogang (pronounced like “shao gong”) story came while reading Michael Meyer’s In Manchuria: A Village Called Wasteland and the Transformation of Rural China (New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2015). Meyer briefly recounts the story of how China overcame the problem of starvation and transformed to economic success. He first reviews the challenges China faced in the 1950s, when the visions of socialism met the reality of poverty and hunger and over 20 million, perhaps over 40 million, died of starvation during the “Great Famine.” Part of the problem was collectivism (Meyer, pp. 214–5). When farmers have their food confiscated and have to live off small rations, a painful reality sets in: there is no incentive to produce more. In fact, hard work burns more calories and will just make you hungrier. The abuse of the system by those with power over redistributing wealth also led to more discouragement and misallocation of resources. Entrepreneurs and those who were relatively successful would be punished for being “rich,” resulting in the loss of much talent and capital that China needed. The misallocation of resources and the crushing of incentives to make products was not just a theoretical nuisance: it led to the starvation of tens of millions.

Lest defenders of communism think such claims come only from hostile partisans, consider the memoirs of a loyal supporter of Mao, Ji Chaozhu, the man who stood at Mao’s side on many occasions as his translator. His book is The Man on Mao’s Right: From Harvard Yard to Tiananmen Square, My Life Inside China’s Foreign Ministry (New York: Random House, 2008). Though a loyal communist, his tales of the disaster of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revelation incidentally reveal the chaos and starvation that occurred before China’s communism added its essential “Chinese characteristics.” Reading it, I could only mourn for the farmers who were given yellow dirt instead of the fertilizer they needed during the Great Leap Forward, and whose vital iron tools were sometimes sacrificed and turned into worthless scrap metal as villages tried to meet ridiculous quotas for collective steel production.

Meyer’s In Manchuria continues with the story of a secret and illegal scheme that would eventually lead to the overthrow of pure collectivism and bring the economic salvation of China. The scheme was forged in the embers of desperation in the tiny village of Xiaogang in Fengyang County, Anhui Province, not far from the large city of Bengbu. My wife and I with two friends would make a pilgrimage from Shanghai to Xiaogang. Few foreigners have ever heard of the village.

In 1978, China was still reeling from the Cultural Revolution, though that came to an end with the death of Mao in 1976. For the villagers in Xiaogang, it was obvious that something besides collectivism was needed, for the harder one worked, the faster one starved. Twenty-five percent of their county had starved to death during the Great Famine from the Great Leap Forward, and over 67 of the 120 villagers in Xiaogang had starved during that time. Now they were starving again. One man, Yan Hongchang, a 29-year-old father of four and deputy leader of the village work team, decided to make a change that would put his life on the line. Meyer describes the scene:

On the night of November 24, Mr. Yan summoned the heads of the village’s twenty families to a secret meeting. The village accountant was deputized as a secretary, and on paper torn from a child’s school exercise book transcribed a seventy-nine-word pledge to divide the commune’s land into family plots, submit the required quota of corn to the state, and keep the rest for themselves. “In the case of failure,” the document concluded “we are prepared for death or prison, and other commune members vow to raise our children until they are eighteen years old.” The farmers signed the document and affixed their fingerprints.

Thus began China’s rural reform.

Today a large stone monument to the pact greets tourists to the village. But in the spring of 1979, a local official who learned of the clandestine agreement fumed that the group had “dug up the cornerstone of socialism” and threatened severe punishment. Thinking he was bound for a labor camp, Mr. Yan rose before dawn, reminded his wife that their fellow villagers had promised to help raise their children, and walked to the office of the county’s party secretary. But the man privately admitted to Mr. Yan that he knew, since the pact had been signed, the village’s winter harvest had increased sixfold. The official told Mr. Yan he would protect Xiaogang village and the rebellious farmers so long as their experiment didn’t spread. (Meyer, pp. 215-216)

But other villagers saw something unusual was going on and made inquiries. The system quickly spread from village to village, leading to a boom in Anhui Province’s agricultural production, with a 600% increase in production, maybe more. Yan Hongchang’s heroism came at just the right time. Rather than being punished as a criminal, Yan would be ultimately be recognized as a hero who inspired Deng Xiaoping. The voice of a few farmers became a thunder, as Xi Jinping said, that roared across China, catalyzing a transformation from poverty to abundance.

It would take time for the political obstacles to be overcome, but the unmistakable success of this second revolution in China could not be denied. Deng Xiaoping would face criticism, but had the courage to bring about new policies over the next few years formalizing the Household Contract Responsibility System, often called da baogan, which allowed families to farm their own allocation of land. They had to give a portion to the state, but the rest they could eat or sell at unregulated prices. Fifteen-year leases to farm plots were introduced in 1984 and then became 30-year leases in 1993. Agricultural taxes were abolished in 2006. (Meyer, pp. 215-217). For details on the rapid changes that took place, see chapter 5, “Disbanding Collective Agriculture,” in Jonathan Unger’s book, The Transformation of Rural China (New York: Routledge, 2002). Also, see the recent interview with Yan Hongchang recorded by Ni Dandan in “The Farmer Who Changed China Forever“ (SixthTone.com, Aug 21, 2018).

The signing of the Xiaogang da baogan contract is captured in a painting displayed at the spacious Da BaoGan Memorial Hall in Xiaogang, a short walk from the easily-overlooked home of Yan Hongchang, which is the key place to visit if you go there. The original of this painting is in a museum in Beijing.

Soon the principle of “household management” would become enshrined in the Chinese Constitution, Article 8:

Working people who belong to rural collective economic organizations shall have the right, within the scope?prescribed by law, to farm cropland and hillsides allotted to them for their private use, engage in household sideline production, and raise privately owned livestock. [emphasis added]

This recognition of a form of property rights for farmers was a vital step in China’s economic resurgence. What is today proudly called “socialism with Chinese characteristics” has traits that seem to resonate with principles of economic freedom and property rights. That economic revolution not only replaced famine with abundance, but has lifted China in many ways, opening doors for intellectual property rights, which also got a foothold in 1984.

The home of Yan Hongchang, where the Xiaogang contract was signed on Nov. 24, 1978.

The windowless room where the Xiaogang contract was signed. We must never forget the courage and desperation of that tiny group of farmers huddled together in a small room with no windows – an important detail, for it meant that local government informants could not walk by and listen to the meeting. The contract they signed specified that if any of them were caught, the others would raise their children. But they would rather risk death by execution than stand by and watch their families continue to starve. I’m so grateful for what they did.

From Agricultural Reform to the Rise of Intellectual Property

Allowing people to control and purchase property, even if still formally owned by the government, and to prosper from their work and their investment of capital, created an environment of relative economic liberty. As collective communes were finally discarded in favor of letting farmers control their own allocations of land and profit from their work, the recognition of property rights also began spreading to the realm of intellectual property. An overview of the early rise of China’s patent law is told by Bonan Lin, Jon Wood, and Soonhee Jang in “Overview of Chinese Patent Law,” 35th International Congress of the PIPA, Toyama, Japan, Oct 19–22, 2004.

China passed its first patent law in 1984 and then created its Patent Office in 1987 under the leadership of a man I deeply admire, Dr. Lulin Gao. Drawing upon his familiarity with the German IP system, he paved the way for the creation of the Patent Office and became its Commissioner, serving from 1987 to 1998. Then he led the way in establishing the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) and served as its first commissioner. While the patent system in its infancy had weaknesses, China has steadily strengthened its IP laws, IP awareness, and IP training. What I saw year after year in China was an urgent effort to strengthen IP laws and IP enforcement, including the establishment of specialized IP courts and programs across the country aimed at helping companies and officials strengthen IP. Patent quality is steadily improving, as is innovation.

China’s IP activity and achievements have come at a nearly hypersonic pace, catching the West off guard. China now leads the world in Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) patent applications. These expensive international applications are usually presumed to be a sign of quality innovation. When China’s domestic patents began to climb rapidly and surpass the filings of many nations, Western voices often suggested that China’s relatively low number of PCT filings revealed that innovation in China was nothing to take very seriously. That argument now lacks any merit. But it still seems to be “common knowledge” in many corporate and government circles that innovation in China is weak and that China relies on copying. A little patent searching will show that China’s patent filings in so many areas, from graphene to paper straws, exceed those in the United States and other nations by such great margins and with such interesting advances that copying utterly fails as an explanation. Yes, copying has occurred, but it’s the value-added innovation on top of learning from others that makes China such a powerhouse. This can no longer be ignored or be downplayed, and hopefully China’s recent hypersonic shot-over-the-bow will help strategists reconsider the power of China to lead, not just copy, in numerous critical areas—including the IP system itself.

Copyright © Jeff Lindsay, 2021

The post The Thunder of China’s Quiet Second Revolution: How a Few Starving Farmers Brought an Economic Boom by Abandoning Collectivism first appeared on Jeff Lindsay's Site and the Shake Well Blog.

After the announcement at ChinaPaper.net, the first report on this story to the English-speaking world, as far as I know, was my original March 6, 2014 report at InnovationFatigue.com followed by an update here on the Shake Well blog that gave a translation of the Chinese story. It was picked up by Intellectual Asset Magazine and by World Trademark Review, but is still a generally unrecognized but important story.

Watch for China to surprise many pundits who decry its lack of IP and innovation. Many Western companies are going to be startled at the tsunami of innovation and IP that will come from the Middle Kingdom, which is rushing to become the epicenter of global innovation and IP value creation. China still has a long ways to go in overcoming its problems and strengthening innovation and IP, but the trends here are remarkable and should not be discounted. Meanwhile, we should welcome stories like Tranlin’s, and watch for many more to come. But for some US companies, this will mean even tougher competition that won’t be easily avoided with restrictive, protective tariffs or antidumping legislation.

The post Update on Tralin Paper (a.k.a. Tranlin Paper or Quanlin Paper): Financing Based on Chinese IP Now Creates Jobs in America first appeared on Jeff Lindsay's Site and the Shake Well Blog.

March 6, 2014: I just learned of breaking news from the Province of Shandong in northern China. A Chinese paper company, Quanlin Paper (also called “Tralin Paper”) has successfully used its portfolio of patents and trademarks to secure a huge loan of 7.9 billion RMB (about $1.3 billion). Potentially significant story for those tracking IP and innovation in China. The story was just reported on March 3, 2014 at China Paper (the story is in Mandarin). This is quite a big deal and may be a record for China in terms of how much value IP brought in seeking a corporate loan. To emphasize the significance of this development, the normally dry China Paper publication begins with a somewhat flowery statement based on an interview with the Chairman, who expresses surprise and delight at how much money they were able to obtain with their IP. Here’s my loose translation, followed by the actual Chinese:

“I never thought that intellectual property could have such a big effect in obtaining this loan. IP was a big part of it,” according to Quanlin Paper Company’s Chairman of the Board, President Li Hongfa, speaking today to a reporter about the 7.9 billion yuan from bank lenders that began this week. He said that this money will help them rapidly expand and seize market opportunities. Money has been tight for business, and this new addition is welcomed just as the mist-covered earth rejoices in the spring rains from the night before.

核心提示：“没想到知识产权能在è¿æ¬¡è´·æ¬¾ä¸­èµ·è¿ä¹ˆå¤§ä½œç”¨,占è¿ä¹ˆå¤§æ¯”重!”泉林纸业有éè´£ä»»å…¬å¸è‘£äº‹é•¿ã€æ€»ç»ç†æŽæ´ªæ³•ä»Šå¤©å¯¹è®°è€…说,79亿元的银团贷款本周已开始放款,è¿ç¬”资金对正在快速扩张、抢抓市场机遇但一直资金紧绷的企业来说,就像雾霾重重的大地喜迎昨夜的春雨。

OK, a bit flowery, but again, this is big news for China and things get flowery when the big news is good. This development shows that IP in China can be valuable (though the portfolio includes some international patents, it is mostly Chinese IP). It also shows that Chinese companies, even in seemingly dull industries like the paper industry, can be innovative and create valuable IP. I haven’t reviewed their IP to assess its value, but I understand they have over 100 Chinese patents in areas such as technology for using straw and other renewable or recycled materials for making paper, with alleged benefits of enhanced environmental friendliness and cost effectiveness. Shandong Province’s IP Office has also created some publicity about Quanlin’s IP estate (see the Chinese article here), though this was before the news of the massive loan secured with the help of IP. Expect more publicity from them shortly.

Further background comes from Baidu’s wiki-like entry on Quanlin Paper.

When nations develop strong IP systems, companies can use their IP to protect their innovations. This also motivates them to take the risk and spend the money need to drive further innovation, and gives investors courage to fund growth and innovation. In this case, it helped give a lending partner (a Chinese financial organization) the courage to loan a giant sum of money to help Tralin grow. Tralin has been pursuing IP not just for tax breaks it seems but also for strategic purposes, and information coming out about this story shows that they have been developing expertise in their staff to develop their IP estate. Sure looks like that has paid off for them.

This is one of many signs that China is becoming serious about IP and innovation, and not just low quality IP, but IP that can provide significant value. For IP to apparently be a crucial part of such a large loan in this challenging economic times is a remarkably positive sign for China, in my opinion.

On the other hand, the loan may be due to politics and guanxi with officials, and the IP is just window dressing. That’s possible. But to even choose IP as the window dressing for publicity and hype is a remarkable thing in it’s own right, and still a sign of China’s rapid transformation in valuing and pursuing intellectual property.

Here is my loose translation of the China Paper article:

泉林纸业知识产权质押融资创国内最高

Quanlin Paper Crafts the Nation’s Largest IP-Backed Financing

泉林公司以110件专利、34件注册商标等质押获得的è¿ç¬”贷款,2月21日在国家知识产权局完成备案。经省知识产权局核实,è¿æ˜¯è¿„今为止国内融资金额最大的一笔知识产权质押贷款。

On Feb. 21, 2014, Quanlin Paper secured a loan using a pledge of intellectual property. The pledge, recorded with the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO), includes 110 patents and 34 registered trademarks. The Shandong Province Intellectual Property Office has verified that this is the largest amount ever financed in China using intellectual property.

“è¿ç¬”资金到位,我们的大项目就能加快推进,市场机遇不等人啊!”李洪法说的大项目,是一个年处理150万吨秸秆的制浆造纸综合利用项目。泉林公司总部位于聊城市高唐县,是一家以浆纸业为核心的大型企业,利用秸秆制造“本色”纸品,变废为宝、环保健康,改å†äº†äººä»¬å¯¹é€ çº¸ä¸šçš„既有印象,也在改变着人们的消费习惯。企业提出è¿ä¸ªå¤§é¡¹ç›®åŽ,很快得到环保部、国家发改委认可、立项,是全国资源综合利用和循环经济示范工程,也是2013年省重点建设项目。目前,项目基本建设已经全面展开,计划年底前建成,投产后,预计年可实现销售收入81.65亿元,销售税金4.89亿元,利润12.4亿元。

“With this funding obtained, we will be able to accelerate our large projects. Market opportunities wait for nobody!” said Chairman Li Hongfa. The primary project Li refers to is a straw-based pulp manufacturing complex for papermaking that will process 1.5 million tons per year of straw. Quanlin company is headquartered in Liaocheng City, Gaotang County (Shandong Province). Quanlinâ€s core business among their large-scale enterprises is pulp and paper manufacturing using straw to create “natural color” paper. Quanlin turns waste into treasure and promotes a healthy environment, transforming both the impression that people have (of the industry) and their habits of consumption.

After the enterprise brought this large project forward, it rapidly gained approval from the Environmental Bureau and the National Development and Reform Commission. The project is an important program for the nationwide comprehensive utilization of resources and a model project for Chinaâ€s recycling economy. It was also considered a provincial key construction project in 2013. Currently, capital construction is fully underway and should be complete by year-end. Once production begins, the expected annual sales revenue will be 8.165 billion RMB, with anticipated sales taxes of 489 million RMB and annual profit of 1.24 billion RMB.

知识产权获资金市场高度认可,对科技型企业无疑是巨大的利好。尽管泉林公司本身的发展就是受益于在知识产权、核心技术上的不断投入——即使在企业资金最困难的时å€,è¿ä¸Šé¢ä¹Ÿä»Žæ¥æ²¡æœ‰â€œçŸ­â€è¿‡,李洪法è¿æ¬¡è¿˜æ˜¯è¢«æ·±æ·±åœ°è§¦åŠ¨äº†:在è¿æ¬¡è´·æ¬¾ä¸­,企业拥有的专利评估价值达到了60亿元,对贷款顺利达成起到了关键作用。è¿æ„å‘³ç€,专利等知识产权不仅能垄断市场、为企业创造长期利润;质押融来真金ç½é“¶,更是能够解决科技型企业成长中最头疼的资金饥渴,释放发展潜力,及时把握市场机遇,让企业“长大”。

For intellectual property to receive this high level of approval from the market is without doubt a giant benefit for technological enterprises in general. Although Quanlin company’s own development has now benefited from their intellectual property, they continue to invest steadily in their core technology—continuing even during the times when investment is most difficult. This is an area where the company has never gone “short.” The result has made a deep impression on Li Hongfa: in the process of obtaining these loans, the appraised value of Quanlinâ€s patents reached 6 billion RMB and played a key role in successfully obtaining the financing. This means that patents and other IP rights are not just about obtaining a monopoly in the market, but can be used to creating long-term profit for the enterprise. They can be used as collateral for significant financing to resolve one the biggest headaches for high-tech businesses, the hunger for funds to grow, to capture hidden potential, grasp favorable market opportunities, and to let the company “grow up.”

è¿ä¸€èžèµ„方式也让银行对科技型企业增添了兴趣。不仅国家开发银行牵头银团,为泉林公司发放了è¿ç¬”79亿元的贷款,交通银行甚至还与省科技厅签署专门的战略合作文件,并推出了专门的知识产权融资产品。交行山东省分行零售信贷部总经理姜鲁荣说,知识产权看似无形,却体现了企业价值创造和持续经营的能力,银行业务风é©æ²¡æœ‰å¢žåŠ ,却有可能抢占一批优质客户,改善银行客户结构,“就像泉林公司è¿æ ·â€ã€‚

This financing will stir the interest of banks other technology enterprises. Not only did the China Development Bank and their affiliates issue Quanlin a loan of 7.9 billion RMB, but the Bank of Communications also signed a strategic cooperation document with the Provincial Science and Technology Department, and launched a specialized intellectual property financing product. Jiang Lurong, General Manager of the Retail Credit Department of Shandong Branch Bank, said that while intellectual property seems invisible, it reflects value creation and the ability to continue operations without increasing banking risk, and can help obtain more high-quality customers, improve the system for customers of the bank such as companies like Quanlin.

Kudos, by the way, to Dr. Ian Feng of Goldeast Paper in Zhenjiang, China for alerting me to the story in China Paper.

The post A Sign of China’s Growth in Intellectual Property: Chinese Company Relies on IP to Gain Giant Loan first appeared on Jeff Lindsay's Site and the Shake Well Blog.

The leaders and speakers of the conference included US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Chief Justice Randall Rader, one of the most brilliant and influential minds in US patent law whose decisions have long been shaping US law and practice. He is a strong advocate of international collaboration and appears to have been one of the primary driving forces between this event. I was pleased to see a total of 7 Federal Circuit judges present, most visiting China for their fist time, including these 6 Circuit Judges: Raymond C. Clevenger III, Richard Linn, Timothy B. Dyk, Sharon Prost, Kimberly A. Moore, and Jimmie V. Reyna. Also playing prominent roles were Gary Locke, US Ambassador to China; David Kappos, Director of the US Patent and Trademark Office; Mark Cohen, the USPTOâ€s former Attaché to the US Embassy in Beijing; Steven C. Lambert, President, Federal Circuit Bar Association; and many others. Mark Cohen wowed the crowd by delivering his speech in fluent Mandarin, though his rather erudite citations of Chinese poetry and classics sometimes challenged the gifted translators who made this bilingual conference accessible to everyone present.

On the Chinese side, we were elated to have active participation by Chief Judge Kong Xiangjun, IPR Tribunal of the Supreme Peopleâ€s Court. Also from the IPR Tribunal of the Supreme Peopleâ€s Court were Deputy Chief Judge Jin Kesheng, Supervisory Attaché Zhang Shengzu, Presiding Judge Yu Xiaobai, Presiding Judge Wang Yongchang, Presiding Judge Xia Junli, and Judge Zhu Li. These judges, with the 7 from the US Federal Circuit, were part of an “en banc” panel discussing US and China law and IP adjudication. Fascinating! Also representing China was Chong Quan, Deputy Deputy China International Trade Representative and a leader of MOFCOM (China Ministry of Commerce).

In addition to many keynote speeches and panel discussions, there were also breakout sessions on such topics such as trademark law, patent litigation, pharmaceutical patent adjudication, and copyright law. Definitely one of the most interesting and information-packed IP conferences I’ve ever attended.

For many, the highlight may have been the afternoon of mock trials in which the same case was presented in an appeal to the US Federal Circuit and to the IPR Tribunal of the Peopleâ€s Supreme Court of China. Judge Rader lead the 3-judge panel for the US mock trial. The mock trials allowed representatives of both nations to quickly grasp important differences in procedure, though both courts came to essentially the same conclusion in a genuinely interesting real case involving an advance in safety equipment for a circular saw. Following the trials, there was further exchange between the judges of both countries as they discussed their different systems and what they had learned from one another. What a tremendous learning experience and example of meaningful international cooperation.

The rapidity of Chinaâ€s progress in IP law and adjudication has been breathtaking, in spite of the many complaints made by voices in the West, and the obvious need for further improvements. But from a historical perspective, to go from virtually no IP law in the early 1980s to a world-class system that is leading the world in patent filing now, with the ability of foreign plaintiffs to win against Chinese companies in Chinese courts, represents massive progress worthy of respect. Exchanges like this recent one in Beijing will influence the thought leaders of both nations to further learn from each other and strengthen our approaches to IP law. Many thanks to all those who made this monumental event possible.

In the closing session, I was able to ask a question to the panelists about what future impact they anticipated might come from this exchange. Chief Judge Kong kindly fielded that question and spoke eloquently of the growth of IP law in China and the rich opportunity they had to draw from the US experience and strengthen their system. There is no doubt in my mind that China is rapidly learning and growing and a visionary eye toward the future. I hope the US can keep up and remain a worthy partner and competitor!

Below are some photos of the event that I took.

Related resources: David Kappos†blog, “China as an IP Stakeholder.”
 

Liu Yang, Exec. VP of the China Law Society, introduces speakers in the first session. Also visible are Mark Cohen (USPTO), Chong Quan (MOFCOM), David Kappos (USPTO), and Shen De Yong (VP of the Supreme People's Court).

First panel.

First session. Left to right: David Kappos (USPTO), Shen Deyong (VP Supreme People's Court), Chief Judge Randall Rader (US CAFC), Chen Jiping (Executive VP, China Law Society), US Ambassador Gary Locke, and Chen Yulu (President, Renmin University).

Chief Judge Randall Rader is one of the rock stars of IP--literally. I asked him if he was going to perform for us in the evening but sadly, he informed me that he had left his band behind in the US for this event. I took the opportunity to compliment Judge Rader on setting a great example by being visibly active in areas other than his profession alone. His pursuit of rock music with a real band, even while in the judiciary, is one of many attributes that makes Judge Rader one of the more interesting and likable people in IP law. His passion for China is also part of the Rader equation. Many thanks for making this historic event happen!

Jeff Lindsay in front of the Ming De complex at Renmin University where the Adjudication Conference was held.

David Kappos, head of the US Patent and Trademark Office, speaks. His support for this event was crucial and much appreciated.

Gary Locke, US Ambassador to China.

Richard Rainey, Executive Counsel, IP Litigation, General Electric.

The post History in the Making: The US-China IP Adjudication Conference, May 28-30, 2012, Beijing first appeared on Jeff Lindsay's Site and the Shake Well Blog.

IPWatchdog.com’s page on confidentiality agreements is a good place to read about NDAs and to see some great sample documents ready for you to use.

The post The Importance of Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) / Confidentiality Agreements (CDAs) first appeared on Jeff Lindsay's Site and the Shake Well Blog.

Both patent lawyers and patent agents can prepare and prosecute patents before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). Both have become licensed to do so by passing the PTO’s own bar exam. The area of patent law is so different from other aspects of law, with its own unique codes and procedures, that it has its own bar exam supervised by the Federal Government. People with a technical degree or technical experience can take the bar exam and become patent agents or, if they already have a law degree, they can become patent lawyers (patent attorneys).

A patent agent can only practice patent law before the PTO. When it comes to other aspects of the law, such as preparing an assignment of a patent, suing someone for infringing, or dealing with patent law before a court, patent agents are powerless. These matters require a qualified attorney.

Patent agents are often hired to assist attorneys or corporations in drafting patents or in supporting patent work. In my case, I was already employed in research and engineering, pursuing patents and patent strategy, when I saw a need to expand my skills. I began studying for the US PTO’s patent bar exam that I took and passed in 1996, with the help of an excellent patent bar exam course offered by Patent Resources Group. I completed additional requirements and became registered as an official US patent agent in 2007, the first employee of my company to become a patent agent, as far as I know. Doing so has opened many doors to me and has helped me be more effective in my research work and in my work to guide and develop patent strategy.

If you have a technical background and an interest in patents, I would encourage you to consider becoming a patent agent. And if you’re interested in a law degree, take the extra time to also become a patent attorney. There is great demand for skills in patent law, and it’s an exciting area to pursue.

The post Patent Lawyers vs. Patent Agents first appeared on Jeff Lindsay's Site and the Shake Well Blog.