The International Forum on Comparative Study between Indian and China on Innovation, Economic Development and Intellectual Property (the Forum) was held in Beijing on December 18^th and 19^th, 2017. The Forum was co-hosted by Renmin University of China Academy of Intellectual Property, Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia (Singapore), Jindal Global University (India), and Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition (Germany), co-organized by IP House and Zhichanlin. Zhichanli will give comprehensive and timely report for the event.

    Dozens of IP practitioners and scholars attended the forum, includint those fro China, India, Germany and the United States. The Forum lasted for two days. Participants discussed the status quo of IP protection in China and India, and focused on the following seven topics: “IP Policy, Codification and National Innovation,” “Information Industry,” “Motion Picture Industry,” “Pharmacutical Industry,” “Plant Variety and Food Security,” “Auto Industry,” and “Peer-production and sharing economy.”

    Now, Zhichanli brought about the detailed report for the Forum on the date of December 18.

    On the opening ceremony, Prof. Wang Yi, Dean of School of Law Renmin University of China (RUC), Prof. Reto Hilty, Director of Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Prof. Zhang Wenjuan from Jindal Global University School of Law, Prof. Liu Kongzhong, Director of the Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia and professor of RUC delivered welcome speeches.

    Prof. Wang Yi stated in his speech that India and China are not only close in geography but also close in history and culture. Today, the world has go into an era of Internet, big data, cloud computing and Artificial Intelligence. He believed that academic exchange and communication in thoughts will contribute the innovation and development of China and India or even the whole world.

    Prof. Reto Hilty said that he is honored to join this forum, to discuss the hot topics in IP with scholars from China and India. He believed that the comparative study of China and India’s IP system will set a good example for the research on other countries.

    Prof. Zhang Wenjuan said that China and India had pursuing different paths of development in the process of globalization. Jindal Global University looks forward to collaborating with more Chinese universities, to promote the cooperation and collaboration among colleges and universities from the two countries. Jindal is trying to contribute to the research and the improvement of the IP systems of the two countries.

    Prof. Liu Kongzhong advocated that China and India should have more academic exchange and collaboration in IP. He looks forward to seeing that through this Forum, scholars and experts from the two countries will have deeper understanding of their IP systems, and have more new ideas for the improvement of their IP systems.

 

 

This section was moderated by Prof. Jin Kesheng, former Vice Chief Judge of the No. 3 Civil Tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court and Professor of China Foreign Affair University. Prof. Guo He, Associate Dean of Academy of IP RUC, Prof. Liu Kongzhong, professor of RUC and SMU, Prof. Zhang Wenjuan, professor of Jindal Global University delivered speeches in this section.

 

Prof. Guo He gave a speech on “The Necessity to Codify IP Rules into the Civil Code.” He pointed out that IP rights are kind of civil rights, therefore they should be governed by civil law and civil law theory. The reason why codifying IP rules into the the Civil Code is important is that this could avoid chaos and conflict in theory as well as in practice if it is not. It has great practical and theoretical significance to the rule of law and the perfection of China’s legal theory to codify IP rules into the Civil Code.

 

Prof. Liu Kongzhong suggested that the general principles of IP could be codified into the Civil Code as a separate volume of the code. IP rights are the number one property rights in the Informaton Age. Its influence on the development of civil law should be fully reflected in the new Civil Code.

 

Prof. Zhang Wenjuan discussed on the topic of “Nation Governance and Its Impact on National Innovation” through comparative study of the development in China and India. Based on her three-year experience of living in India, she introduced the difference in technological innovation between the two countries, especially the difference in policies, systems, social mobility and education systems, etc. She pointed out that the difference and the common points in different aspects of nation government between the two countries led us to think deeper on the question of how to build a cultural innovation framework that is compatible to the unique situation of the nations.

 

Thereafter, Prof. Wang Yi, Dean of RUC School of Law and Prof. Zheng Youde, professor of the School of Law, Huazhong University of Science and Technology commented on the speeches and shared their thoughts on the foregoing topics.

 

 

This section was moderated by Prof. Reto Hilty, Director of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition. Prof. Chen Xiangdong, professor of Beihang University School of Economics and Management, and Prof. Biswajit Dhar, professor of Jawaharlal Nehru University gave keynote speeches in turn.

 

Prof. Chen introduced the status quo of China’s information industry and compared that with the market mechanism of India’s information industry. He observed that the difference between China and India’s information industry lies in aspects such as the manufacturing industry, infrastructure, policy support and the extent of openness, etc. Today, the boundary of ICT industry has become blurring. Consider that the industry is developing so fast, and the economic statistics and data collection is dynamic, it is wonder that the whether the concept of big data and AI should be redefined.

 

Prof. Biswajit Dhar introduced the practice in India’s information industry and stated that according experience from the west, innovation needs financial support from the government. The same is India. From 1980s, Indian government did a lot to support the development of enterprises in producing chips and semi-conductors. Of course, it is not enough to merely rely on government. The development of information industry needs effort from both the private sector and the public sector.

 

Thereafter, Prof. Reji K. Joseph from Institute for Studies in Industrial Development (India) and Associate Professor Li Xibao from Tsinghua University School of Economics and Management Department of Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Strategy commented on the speeches and expressed their opinions on the topics.

 

 

This section was moderated by Prof. Dana Beldiman, professor of Bucerius Law School, Hamburg, Germany. Prof. Beldiman also introduced the current development of the motion picture industries in China and India.

 

Ms. Li Yanbing, Researcher of the Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia, Singapore, and Mr. Lv Mudong from Tencent Legal Department delivered speeches on “Industry Change in China from the Perspectives of Copyright, Policy and Market,”

 

Ms. Li Yanbing first introduced the development of China’s motion picture industry and the copyright protection in different phases of the development. In her opinion, the most crucial issue is how to increase the diversity of the revenue source of the motion picture industry. For China, the revenue of the motion picture industry largely depends on revenue from box office. But this is far from enough. We need to enhance copyright protection so as to create more channels for remuneration.

 

Mr. Lv Mudong pointed out that copyright disputed in China’s motion picture industry had been solved within the industry association through negotiation and seldom went to court. With the development of technology and the business models and new ways of licensing creative works, what would be the boundary of rights for the new technology? Should we focus more on encouraging the dissemtation of knowledge, or the protection of original works? These all brings new challenges to China’s legislation and the court system.

 

Prof. Li Yahong, professor of Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong, gave a speech on “Hong Kong’s Film Industry and Copyright Protection.” Prof. Li Yahong first introduced the rise and decline of Hong Kong’s film industry and the impact of Hong Kong’s copyright act on the development of the film industry. She pointed out that, the cooperation in the film industry between Hong Kong and mainland China has been deepen. Mainland China is also promoting its cultural industry to go globe. This provides a good opportunity for Hong Kong’s film industry. But whether or not Hong Kong’s film industry would resurge is still still full of uncertainty.

 

Prof. Prashant Reddy, professor of the National Law School of India University, joined the Forum via webcam. He introduced the history and practice of copyright royalty collection system in India motion picture industry. Prof. Prashant Reddy pointed out that in India the music industry is closely connected to the film industry and music has become an essential part of Bollywood movies. With the development of new technology, many copyright holder of music sign license agreement with different users. So problems follow. Who own the right of attribution of the musical work in the movie? How to distribute the copyright royalty of the musical works among different right holders? These problems have not yet been solved and have brought a lot to trouble to the film and music industry.

 

Prof. Arpan Banerjee from Jindal Global University introduced the mechnanism of shutting down pirating websites in India from the perspective of law, business and politics. He pointed out that under the framework of copyright, whether the right holders have the rights to shut down pirate websites is still a question of controversy. On one hand, websites spread widely, it is hard to shut all them down. On the other hand, it is unrealistic to require courts to monitor BT website 24 hours 7 days. For now, courts in New Delhi use GPS to locate pirate websites and then shut them down.

 

Thereafter, Prof. Li Chen from RUC and Wang Jun, attorneys of the Yingke Law Firm commented on the speeches and exchanged ideas with the audience.

 

This section was moderated by Dr. Malathi Lakshmikumaran, Partner of Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan. He also briefly introduced the development of the pharmacutical industry in India.

 

Prof. Chen Xiangdong from Beihang University School of Economics and Management pointed out that China’s pharmacutical technological innovation system is restraint by factors such as the social security system and market demand. The Chinese government strictly control the entrance to the market and the price of medcine. This make the price of medcine in China very low. And pharmacutical firms have not enough incentives to invest in innovation.

 

After Prof. Chen Xiangdong’s speech, Ms. Xue Shaofang, Prof. Chen’s student for the Master’s degree program, shared her research on the comparative study of China and India’s pharmacutical industry. Her research analyzed the issue from the four different perspective of macro economics, competition in the industry, policy background and market environment. She stated that, the benefit and scale of China’s pharmacutical industry grows drastically. However, the market system for patented drugs are still not perfect. Firms spend little resources on the R&D of non-patented drugs. And pharmacutical firms’ investment on R&D is relatively too low.

 

Associate Professor He Jun of Tsinghua University (Shenzhen Campus) introduced the development of India’s patent law system in different historical periods, and analyzed Indian patent law’s impact on the development of the pharmacutical industry by analyzing leading cases in pharmacutical patents. She pointed out that Inida had made good use of the flexibility and discretion provided by TRIPs agreement to develop its pharmacutical industry. On the contrary, China did not do the same thing. And we need to rethink about this issue.

 

Mr. Shubha Ghosh, Director of the Technology Commercialization Law Center, Syracuse University College of Law, introduce the compulsory license system in India’s patent law and its impact on the development of the production of generic drug in India, and its teaching to China’s counterparts. He pointed out that after the 2005 revision of Indian patent law, Indian pharmacutical firms enhanced cooperation with Chinese firms in R&D. This to some extent is good for the innovation and market competition for India’s pharmacutical industry.

 

Prof. Reji K. Joseph from Institute for Studies in Industrial Development introduced the Indian experience of the industry for the production of generic drugs. Prof. Reji K. Joseph pointed out that, India’s patent law has positive effect on encourage foregin investment on R&D. And the public interest clause in the patent law provides that the government can supervise the price of generic drug. So the patent law on one hand encourages the innovation of new drugs, on the other hand makes sure the price do not go too high to burden the Indian citizens.

 

Afterwards, Cheng Yongshun, Director of Beijing IP Institute, and Song Ruilin, Executive Directive Song Ruilin of China Pharmaceutical Innovation and Research Development Association, commented the speeches and shared their thoughts on the hot topics in the pharmaceultical industry.

 

The Forum provided a good exchange platform for scholars from China and India. The first day of the Forum ended in a very good atmosphere.

 

On the second day of the Forum, IP experts and scholars from China, India, Germany and the United States discussed on the issues of “Plant Variety and Food Security,” “Auto Industry,” and “Peer Production and Sharing Economy,” based on the practice of China and India.

 

 

This section was moderated by Mr. Shubha Ghosh, Director of the Technology Commercialization Law Center, Syracuse University College of Law. Prof. Hou Yangkun, Associate Professor of Beijing Institute of Technology, Dr. Sun Juanjuan, Post-doc of Renmin University of China, Dr. MalathiLakshmikumaran from the Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan, and Prof. Sunita Tripathy, professor of Jindal Global Univeristy School of Law delivered keynote speeches.

 

Assocate Professor Hou Yangkun illustrated the problems and issues in the protection of plant variety in China under the existing legal framework. He suggested China to adopt the text of 1991 of the UPOV, to create a “right to the name of plant variety,” to set a threshold level for statutory damage and compansation, to set up a non-competition system, to give standing to stakeholders in civil cases, to define derivative varieties and the right of plant variety more accurately, and to criminalize certain infringing acts.

 

Dr. Sun Juanjuan delivered a speech entitled Genetically Modified Food in China: To Regulate or Not? She introduced that China has been active in the research and supervision on genetically modified food. But we should still be cautious on the application of such research and regulations. Although China has set strict legal framework on genetially modified food, the law to punish the steal of plant variety is still not stringent enough. This is an important problem we need to fix in the future.

 

Dr. Malathi Lakshmikumaran introduced the IP protection and price control for genetically modified plant in India. She stated under the existing patent law in India, genetically modified plant is not patentable. However, there is still controversy on the question of which type of technology of genetical modification is patentable.

 

Prof. Sunita Tripathy discussed on issues such as the security of food supply, food security and the development of standardization, and the sustainable development of biological economy. She pointed out that India faced with problems like global warming, land and air pollution, just as the other developing countries. India has promulgated a series of guiding, mandatory policies on natural resource and food security in order to ensure the sustainable development of the biological economy, just as what China has done.

 

Afterwards, Zhao Jiuran, Director of the Maize Research Centre, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, and Li Judan, Associate Researcher of Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, commented on the speeches, and shared their thoughts on the topic of the protection of plant variety and food security.

 

This section was moderated by Prof. Zhang Guangliang, associate professor of IP department of Renmin University of China School of Law. Mr. Liang Fan, Senior IP Consultant of the Asica-Pacific District, HPE, Dr. Liu Xiaodi from Tsinghua University Auto Research Institute in Suzhou, and Professor Guo He, Associate Dean of Academy of IP, RUC, Ms. Smita Miglanis, Associate Researcher of ICRIER, and Prof. Vivekannandan, Dean of Bennett University School of Law delivered speeches.

 

Mr. Liang Fan introduced IP issues in the process of ungrading the manufacturing industry, from the perspective of the auto industry. He pointed out that, in the fierce comptition in the market, the level of an auto firm depends on its brands, which relates to its trademark, and its technology, which relates to patent and technological secret. China has lower human resource cost and consumption, and the capacity of innovation and research is not strong enough, and the level of technology is still relatively low. These are the obstacles for the development of China’s auto industry.

 

Dr. Liu Xiaodi compared the development of auto industries in China and India, and analyzed the trend of development of China’s auto industry. He pointed out that China will be the largest market for automobiles. At the same time, China should be clear that our technology is still far behind that of the developed countries. Central and local government should provide more funding to encourage auto industry to commit to indigenous innovation.

 

Prof. Guo He analyzed the marco issues in China’s auto industry, and discussed the impact of the policies on the development of the industry. He observed that Chinese government has made clear that market should be the deciding factor for resource allocation. However, market economy are still growing in China. Today, new energy cars, intelligent cars and self-driving cars attracts a lot of attention. And he believed that government funding to these sub-divisions of the auto industry should be fair and equal and should not discriminate one another.

 

Ms. Smita Miglanis stated that from the 1980s Indian auto firms cooperated with foreign auto firms in the form of joint ventures to impove the technology of making whole cars. At the same time, Indian government made a series of policies to encourage joint ventures and the transfer of technology. The effect of these polices were very positive. However, India’s policy on recycling of auto materials is not very clear and need to be clarify.

 

Based on his comparative study on auto industries in China, India and South Korea, Prof. Vivekanandan observed that traditional auto industry need to prepare itself for a drastic transition with Qualcomn, Google and other high-tech companies joining the competition. The development of auto industry relies on technological innovation, therefore, it needs IP protection. He pointed out that there are many features in common between China and Indian in the auto industry. And India need to study the IP litigations in auto industry.

 

Associate Professor Yao Huanqing from Academy of IP RUC and Associate Professor Feng Kaidong fro Peking University School of Government Management commented on the foregoing speeches.

 

 

This section was moderated by Prof. Liu Kongzhong, Director of the Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia and professor of RUC. Dr. Liu Shaojun, Assistant Researcher of Beijing Institute of Social Science, Ma Yide, Director of Zhongguancun Intellectual Property Strategy Research Institute, Dr. Gu Xin, Researcher of IP Development Research Center SIPO, Prof. Arul George Scaria, professor of Innovation, Intellectual Property and Competition Center, National Law School University, Delhi, delivered speeches.

 

Dr. Liu Shaojun, Assistant Researcher of Beijing Institute of Social Science illustrated the birth and evolution of the sharing economy by analyzing different development phases of the Internet economy. She argued that relying on demographic dividend, companies in China and India may make good use of the dramatic increase of users and the scale of the firms may develop fast in sharing economy. The lesson we can learn from successful models of sharing economy is that the growth of a firm depends not only on its innovation capacity, but also its good judgment on grasping the chance of creating economic value.

 

Director Ma Yide introduced the concept and mechanism of sharing economy and the practice in China. He pointed out three problems challenging China’s sharing economy. First, the conflict between sharing economy and the old management system need to be solved. Second, how to sustain the sharing economy system? Third, sharing economy also brings about some negative outcomes and how to solve this problem.

 

Dr. Gu Xin said that in the context of sharing economy, there are many patent litigations aiming at raising public awareness of brands instead of enforce ones’ patent rights. For example, the reverse confusion case of “ofo” trademark is a case that attract a lot of attention. Besides, the anti-trust issues in sharing economy also need to be dealt with. He asked should new business models be protected in new form and new field of business. If so, should they be protected by existing IP laws, or by sui generis legislation? These are issues need to be explored by all the colleagues in the industry.

 

Prof. Zheng Youde, professor of Huazhong University of Science and Technology School of Law commented on the foregoing speeches and shared his opinions on the sharing economy in China.

 

Prof. Arul George Scaria gave a speech on How to Promote Innovation Culture on the Internet in Sharing Economy. He introduced the practice of open innovation model and its positive impact on industries in India. In his view, industries in China and India should be more open to the access to IPs, to allow sharing and disseminating of knowledge while enhancing copyright protection.

 

Mr. Zhang Xuan, the founder of Zhichanli and IP House, gave brilliant comments on Prof. Arul George Scaria’s talk. And he shared his understanding of the sharing economy in India.

 

In the end of the Forum, Prof. Liu Kongzhong, Director of the Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia and professor of RUC, Prof. Reto Hilty, Director of Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, and Prof. Liu Chuntian of Renmin University of China delivered concluding speeches at the close ceremony.

 

Prof. Liu Kongzhong said that this Forum built a platform for exchange among industries in China and India. He believed that the participants would contribute to the development of innovation and IP system of the two countries.

 

Prof. Reto Hilty said the speakers had informed him with the latetest development of China’s film, auto, pharmaceutical industry and IP system. He is willing to have deeper discussion with all the participants on the foregoing topics.

 

Prof. Liu Chuntian expressed his congratulation to the success of the Forum on behalf of the organizers. He hoped that with the efforts from China and India, we could establish a long-term exchange mechanism to promote the economic development of industries in China and India.