Posted February 3, 2015

 

REMSCHEID, Germany and SHANGHAI, China – In the legal dispute about two patent infringements of Oerlikon Barmag Texturing Technologies by a Chinese competitor, the Higher People's Court of Fujian Province upheld Oerlikon Barmag’s application, according to an Oerlikon news release.

 

A cessation of the patent infringement and a compensation for damages were obtained against a yarn manufacturer from Quanzhou in the Chinese province Fujian, which had purchased the machines in question. The judgment of the first instance was upheld on appeal and resulted in a decommissioning of the machines.

 

As a manufacturer of innovative leading textile machinery and equipment, Oerlikon Barmag said is strongly believes in the effective protection of internally generated intellectual property. Peter Lau, senior IP counsel at Oerlikon Manmade Fibers, said he appreciates the fact that now Chinese authorities and Chinese courts consequently sanction intellectual property right violations, and the jurisdiction in China will in the future be strengthened by specific intellectual property (IP) courts.

 

"Inventive spirit needs a protected space, in which it can unfold,” Lau said. “This is the basis of innovative products and technologies. China is an important market for us, which we want to furthermore supply with technologically sophisticated products comprising a large share of engineering as well as research and development activities. In this respect, we welcome this development and will also in the future, not tolerate any violation of our property rights in China."

 

The figures confirm that the more consequent, strong actions of the Chinese State with regard to property rights, is not just a subjective evaluation, Oerlikon said. According to the German newspaper Handelsblatt, several 10 thousand cases per year are being negotiated in Chinese courts, with an upward trend. Not only foreign companies act as plaintiffs; Chinese companies are increasingly insisting on the protection of intellectual property. Judgments are usually given against the infringer of the patent as well as against the buyer of the infringing product.

 

Source: Oerlikon