In a move that will have significant impact on copyright and rights management, China's State Council earlier this month approved a National Intellectual Property Strategy, which includes the probability of specialized IP Courts. Initial rulings may emerge later this calendar year.

China already has an elaborate IPR regime, has been a member of WIPO convention since 1980, and has been a signatory to a number of treaties since then. It has laws on patents, trade marks, industrial design, copyright, unfair competition, computer programs, and layout of integrated circuits; has educational institutions that teach intellectual property; and has an intellectual property enforcement regime including legal remedies.

But as many practitioners know, the reality is rather different. Many counterfeited branded and content products go out the factory door on the night shift. Communications infrastructures that enable enforcement outside the main cities is poor, and even then, enforcement outside the main cities is a lottery in which even a legal judgment and remedy (e.g., fine), if obtained, can be very difficult to complete (collect). IP holders often say that it is difficult to transfer cases from the administrative system to the criminal systems.

A unified specialized IP court system would reduce these problems.

These developments come after the US launched two WTO cases against China last year dealing with alleged deficiencies in the legal regime for protecting and enforcing copyrights and trademarks, and in barriers to trade in some creative works.

Yet having a central IP court in Beijing is placing a competence where bureaucracy already works. The skyline of Shanghai is a testament to China's creativity and competence. The challenge remains the outlying areas.

China recognized these realities years ago. This author spoke on intellectual property in Beijing, on the day in September 2006 when President Hu Jintao announced that IPR was China's number one priority. Clearly, with this new announcement, the Chinese government has recognized that a key challenge is enforcement: they have announced specialized courts to deal with IP-related civil, administrative and criminal cases.

This national strategy has other objectives. such as refining litigation procedures, the role of expert witnesses, and technical investigations; improving policies relating to patent standards; and enabling compulsory licensing.

This is a major development that will be welcome to many western businesses and creative people. However, the challenge of establishing a unified efficient IPR structure should not be underestimated in a country where other infrastructure challenges remain, from power to travel to banking. IPR and rights management does not exist in a vacuum. Management of rights requires all infrastructure components to work together as a system nationwide.

Link to full article on DRMwatch