Changhong vs Sisvel, Seven-Year Patent Lawsuit Runs to Win

2018Year4Month26Day is the 18th World Intellectual Property Day; this day is also an extraordinary day for Changhong, a "German Supreme Court rejected ItalySisvelThe court notice of the company's request for review is for Changhong and.SisvelThe seven-year cross-border patent dispute between the two countries ended. After seven years of patent litigation, Changhong finally won the victory.

Changhong andSisvelThe victory of the patent lawsuit is also an important milestone in the response of Chinese enterprises to intellectual property disputes. In recent years, with the development of Chinese enterprises in various fields, "going out" has become the only way. When Chinese companies are overcoming difficulties in the international market and their market share is getting higher and higher, foreign companies are also waving "intellectual property sticks" to them ". China's home appliance industry is one of the hardest hit by intellectual property litigation cases, Changhong andSisvelThe patent litigation case is one of the representative cases.

Italy'sSisvelThe company may not be familiar to consumers, but it is no stranger to many companies in the consumer electronics industry. It is a company specializing in patent licensing that has grown over three decades into an offensive global patent licensing group with a global team of talented individuals with extensive technical, legal and patent licensing expertise.SisvelHas extensive experience in patent management, and its patents include earlyMP3andMPEGAudioand other audio compression standards, as well as video product design techniques, suchOSDtechnology (screen display technology),ATSS(automatic tuning and sorting system) andWSS(widescreen signaling for automatic TV image format switching), and the still very active3G,4G,Wifiand other technologies.

2004years since,Sisvelone after another, chinese enterprises were asked to hold negotiations and sign up for patent licenses, and the results were quite fruitful, and changhong also approached and negotiated with them,2008The two sides reachedMP3Audio Patent License Agreement. And brands that have not reached an agreement with them becomeSisvelThe object of the attack, such as in2007YearCebitAt the exhibition,SisvelThe company applied to the court for a temporary injunction and the customs police to enforce the injunction to seize and take away the Chinese mainland's Huaqi, Newman and other products;2008Year of GermanyIFAOn the opening day of the exhibition,69Chinese, South Korea and European companiesMP3Audio-related products and TV products of a number of color TV companies were seized.

according to our understanding,2009years,SisvelBegin to use TV-related patents to pressure Changhong, asking for relevant licensing negotiations. However, Changhong's intellectual property team has analyzed that Changhong's products have not infringed its claimed patents. Since then, the two sides have reached an agreement after many negotiations. So, in2011Year of GermanyIPADuring the exhibition,SisvelIn Germany, Changhong was sued for infringement of its patent, asking Changhong to stop selling and compensate for losses in Germany. Changhong intellectual property team to start the response plan, quickly selected the German law firm fasbo as a representative, actively respond to the lawsuit, in accordance with the German court proceedings, in2Submission of agency response and response documents within weeks.2012Year5Month8On the same day, the German Mannheim court made a first-instance judgment and rejected it.SisvelAll litigation claims, Changhong achieved a preliminary victory in the case.

SisvelThe company still refuses to let go, relying on the German Patent Court to determine the revised patent valid judgment, in.2012Year7month of prosecution. Changhong team after careful analysis and judgment, and combined with the opinions issued by German experts, in.2012Year9month filed a plea.2014Year4In January, the High Court of Karlsruhr, Germany, ruled in favor of Changhong and won the second trial.SisvelThe decision of the Court of Second Instance was still being appealed to the Supreme Court of Germany for review.2018Year4Month18The German Supreme Court issued a document rejectingSisvelThe review request, Changhong won the final victory. At this point, Changhong andSisvelThe company's seven-year patent infringement lawsuit has finally come to an end.

However, the patent lawsuits encountered by Changhong are not isolated cases encountered by Chinese home appliance companies.2015Year11In January, the Düsseldorf District Court of GermanySisvelThe company v. Haier Company made a first-instance judgment in two patent infringement disputes involving infringement of its wireless technology portfolio, and ordered Haier Company to stop selling universal mobile communication systems (UMTS) and General Packet Radio Service technology (GPRS) of mobile equipment, submit accounts and compensate for economic losses;2017Year6In January, Sharp filed a lawsuit with the California State Court, requesting the court to order Hisense Group to stop using"SHARP"trademark, and compensation for at least1Billion US dollars; soon, Sharp sued Hisense Group on the grounds that Hisense Group infringed its patent rights, demanding a ban on the sale of related products, and at the same time asked the US International Trade Commission (ITC) to investigate Hisense Group.

Although Chinese home appliance companies have continuously learned lessons in the process of "going out" in recent years, it is undeniable that they are also actively thinking about countermeasures. While striving to improve their own technical level, they are also actively improving their own intellectual property layout, including cooperation with International home appliance companies have reached patent licensing agreements and actively participated in standard formulation. However, it is not possible to complete the short board in the field of intellectual property rights overnight. Due to the lack of using intellectual property rights as a means of competition, the lack of high-value patents, and the complex operating environment of intellectual property rights in the field of international household appliances, China's household appliance enterprises are still in a passive position.

Changhong's patent lawsuit has also set a good benchmark for Chinese home appliance companies. In this case, the faceSisvelThis kind of company with patent licensing as its business model can only win the final victory if it strives for reason, and blindly compromise may lay a greater hidden danger for the future. Of course, Changhong has always been in the forefront of intellectual property protection. Changhong Group ranks in the forefront of the industry in terms of authorized effective patents and invention patents. It also has patent layout in core key technologies, and the transformation and implementation rate of patented technology is as high60%Above.

In the introduction of successful experience, the person in charge of Changhong intellectual property said that the following ways can be followed when carrying out intellectual property protection work. First of all, to make up for the "short board" of the company's weak awareness of intellectual property protection, not only the management of the company should have the awareness of intellectual property protection, but also the ordinary employees of the company need to have the awareness of intellectual property related. Secondly, we should carry out the hierarchical management of patents, pay equal attention to the quantity and quality of patent applications, and vigorously cultivate high-value patents. Thirdly, we should actively cultivate professionals who can deal with complex international intellectual property related affairs, and seriously explore and analyze the operation mode of intellectual property rights. Finally, once you encounter a patent infringement lawsuit abroad, you should quickly cooperate with a team of foreign local lawyers to carry out patent analysis, technical analysis, market analysis, legal analysis, third-party testing, etc., and actively seek expert advice to accurately and quickly respond to the litigation process. Only in all aspects of the implementation in place, in order to try to avoid the occurrence of tort compensation.