With the rapid development of China's rubber tire industry, the increase in the number of intellectual property rights such as patents, trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights, etc., the improvement of corporate rights awareness, and the increasingly close intellectual property "net" with internationally renowned companies have produced positive Collisions, confrontations, infringements and disputes are on the rise. How do domestic tire companies break the barriers to intellectual property?
According to Sun Lifang, the review and invalidation department of the State Intellectual Property Office, in China, the current application for patents in the tire field is in its infancy, with the number of applications from only 300 in 2005 to more than 3,000 in 2018.
Foreign companies still fully demonstrate the layout strategy of “products are not moving, patents are first”. Sun Lifang's researcher found that the rapid growth of the tire industry is mainly due to the increase in the number of applications from internationally renowned tire companies. This aspect of growth indicates that the prospects of China's tire industry are consistently optimistic by international companies, but on the other hand, it also reflects the international tire companies in China. The “net” of the woven patents is getting denser and denser, and the development of the domestic tire industry is more difficult and the competition is more intense. The most well-known case is the patent invalidation and lawsuit of Saatchi and VMI Holland.
According to a set of data provided by Mr. Rui Ruixue, a partner of Covington & Burling Law Firm, there were 59 cases filed in the US 337 in 2017, the highest in the past five years. Among them, 337 investigations involving Chinese companies reached 22, accounting for about one-third of the annual cases, and the absolute number reached a record high.
The 337 investigation is one of the important means by which the United States blocks or restricts the entry of foreign companies or their products into the US market. The 337 investigation has also been targeted at the Chinese rubber industry. The most well-known cases are the rubber anti-aging agent case of the American Flexex Company and the St. O. in 2005, and the rubber resin case of the Chinese Huaqi Chemical in 2012 by St. Lecot.
Feng Yaoling, a senior tire expert of the China Rubber Industry Association tire expert group, compared the differences in tire standards between China and Europe, the United States and other countries and regions. He said that it is because of the slight difference in the tire sidewall marking, etc., but because there is no standard discourse right, it has caused trouble for the manufacturing and product export of China's tire companies, and also caused many inconveniences to consumers.