Insights

On 22 October, the Executive Yuan in the Taiwan region approved a draft amendment that would let graphical user interfaces (GUIs) be protected on their own, allow similar designs in one application and extend the design grace period from 6 to 12 months (news). It is still a draft. Foreign brands that make products in mainland China often ask how the same questions work there. This guide covers the key points of mainland China's design patent rules under the Patent Law (amended 2020), its Implementing Regulations and CNIPA's examination guidelines. It is general information; individual cases need professional advice.

The Milan seat of the Unified Patent Court's Central Division ruled on 22 October in Sandoz v Novo Nordisk (UPC_CFI_2221/2026) that, if a patentee withdraws a patent during revocation proceedings while pursuing substantially the same protection through a divisional application, the court may refuse to close the case and still decide whether the patent lacked inventive step. Where necessary, it may also order the patentee not to withdraw its approval of the patent text at the EPO.

The same patent can win an infringement case in one forum and be found invalid in another. That has just happened in Europe: DivX won an injunction against Netflix at the Unified Patent Court in September, and in October an EPO Opposition Division announced the revocation of the same patent (news). China also runs two tracks. Courts decide infringement; whether the patent is valid is decided by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) in invalidation proceedings. If you sue for patent infringement in China, expect the defendant to file an invalidation request. What follows is general guidance based on the Patent Law and the Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Patent Dispute Cases (amended 2020); individual cases need professional advice.

In Concord Music Group v. Anthropic (5:24-cv-03811-EKL) in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, the 21 October hearing ran for 4 hours 43 minutes and Judge Eumi K. Lee did not rule on fair use from the bench. The court has since set a continued hearing by Zoom for 30 October at 1 p.m. on the remaining Daubert motions, the disputes over whether each side's expert evidence can be admitted.

On 23 October the court made public the questions it had sent the parties before the hearing (ECF No. 918).

Getty Images has started a prepackaged Chapter 11 restructuring in the United States and says its image libraries continue to operate normally (news). Whatever happens to any one agency, the episode is a reminder that a stock image licence is a contract, and your only proof of it is the paperwork you kept. That matters in China, where image copyright complaints on marketplaces and demand letters over website and catalogue images are common. This guide explains what to keep and check before you use licensed images in China. It is general information; Chinese copyright law, the licence terms and the facts of each case decide the outcome.

One patent, two opposite results within a month. DivX's European patent with unitary effect EP4213033 (a video distribution system with progressive playback) won an injunction against Netflix at the Unified Patent Court (UPC) on 15 September covering 18 countries; on 13 October, after oral proceedings, the European Patent Office (EPO) opposition division announced that the patent is revoked.

UPC: counterclaim dismissed, injunction in 18 states

In its decision of 15 September, the UPC Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_465/2025 and UPC_CFI_1121/2025) dismissed Netflix's counterclaim for revocation and found five Netflix companies liable for indirect infringement of claim 1.