In a significant development for China’s legal landscape, the Supreme People’s Court has articulated a sophisticated approach to intellectual property jurisprudence that carefully balances robust protection for innovators with broader public interest considerations. Deputy Chief Judge He Zhonglin of the court’s Intellectual Property Division revealed compelling data demonstrating this dual-focused strategy in action.
Since its establishment in January 2019, the specialized IP Court has rendered punitive damages in 58 separate cases, amounting to total compensation awards of 2.05 billion yuan (approximately $295 million). Additionally, 73 cases have resulted in individual compensation exceeding 10 million yuan, collectively totaling 5.24 billion yuan in awarded damages.
Judge He characterized protection and interest balancing as two fundamental pillars of effective IP governance. “Protection serves as the foundational element,” he explained, “while interest balancing represents the ultimate objective of our judicial work.” This philosophy responds to the increasing complexity of IP cases, particularly those involving cutting-edge technologies and strategic emerging industries.
The rising compensation figures reflect both China’s evolving economic landscape and deliberate judicial policy. Judge He noted that higher awards directly correlate with the nation’s technological advancement, market expansion, and intensified business competition. “As China progresses toward high-quality development,” he observed, “intellectual property has transformed into core corporate assets and critical competitive tools, consequently increasing market valuations and amplifying the impact of infringement activities.”
Addressing whether higher compensation invariably signifies better protection, Judge He emphasized evidentiary rigor as the court’s guiding principle. The judiciary calibrates awards according to innovation levels and infringement severity—applying substantial damages for highly innovative works with significant harm, while awarding appropriate but reduced compensation for cases involving modest innovation with limited damage.
The court’s approach represents implementation of both central leadership directives and legal mandates strengthening IP rights. Looking forward, Judge He affirmed the court’s commitment to “maintaining strict protection while optimally balancing rights holders’ interests with public benefits, ultimately achieving equilibrium between protection and innovation promotion to stimulate market competition vitality.”