Guidance

China Intellectual Property newsletter (August 2026）

Updated 4 September 2026

This is an ad-hoc newsletter to inform UK stakeholders of recent developments in the Chinese IP environment. The content is collected from publicly available sources, where information is often available in Chinese only. Please feel free to forward this newsletter, and contact Leo.Zhuang@fcdo.gov.uk to be added to/removed from the distribution list. An ODT version is available on the Embassy’s IP webpage

1. Police and government

1.1 China issues the 15th Five-Year Plan for IP protection and utilisation

On 27 July, the State Council issued the Intellectual Property Protection and Utilisation Plan for the 15th Five-Year Period, setting out China’s vision for strengthening its IP system to 2030. A key priority is the development of protection frameworks for emerging areas, including AI, algorithm-generated content, platform economies, data-related rights, open-source technologies and space-related IP. The Plan also highlights the protection of traditional knowledge, traditional Chinese medicine, genetic resources and cultural heritage. Judicial reforms will continue to improve the handling of IP disputes, promote greater consistency in legal interpretation and expand the use of punitive damages for serious infringement. The authorities will also strengthen alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, including mediation, arbitration and notarial services. Financial innovation is another major focus. The Plan supports the development of IP financing tools such as IP-backed financing, securitisation, insurance products and investment funds. It also seeks to improve IP valuation systems and broaden access to IP-backed finance for businesses. Read China’s 15th Five-Year Plan for IP protection in Chinese

1.2 CNIPA revises measures for fast-track examination of patents

On 28 July, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) published the revised Measures for the Administration of Priority Examination of Patents, which will replace the 2017 Measures. Under the 2017 Measures, priority examination was available for applications in broadly defined sectors such as environmental technology, IT, biomedicine, and high-end manufacturing. The 2026 revision introduces stricter eligibility requirements. Falling within a qualifying industry or category will no longer be sufficient. To qualify for priority examination, a patent application or re-examination case must also demonstrate significant innovative value and strong prospects for commercialisation or practical application. The revised Measures also expressly exclude certain applications from priority examination, including divisional applications derived from patents that have already received priority examination, and cases where an invention patent application and a utility model application for the same invention are filed simultaneously. Read the full revised measures from CNIPA in Chinese

1.3 CNIPA revises regulations for designs of chip layout

On 23 July, the CNIPA published revised the Regulations on the Protection of Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits, which will take effect on 15 October 2026, replacing the 2001 version. The revised Regulations expand protection to photonic and quantum integrated circuits and introduce a new requirement for applicants to submit a declaration identifying the original elements and key functional or design features. They also allow third parties to request cancellation of registrations that do not comply with legal requirements, whereas previously only CNIPA could initiate cancellation. To strengthen oversight, applicants must submit originals, drawings and an originality declaration. CNIPA may reject or revoke fraudulent filings. In cases of force majeure, e.g. natural disasters, war, pandemic, that prevents applicants from meeting procedural deadlines and thereby resulting in loss of rights, applicants may seek restoration of rights. Read the full revised regulations from CNIPA in Chinese

2. Judicial updates

2.1 SPC revises judicial interpretation on copyright civil disputes

On 20 August, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued an amended ‘Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Copyright Civil Dispute Cases’, replacing the 2020 version. A significant change broadens the definition of ‘making a work available to the public’. Publication no longer depends on the copyright owner’s authorisation and now covers any disclosure of a work to an unspecified audience, including through unauthorised or infringing acts. The amendments also expand the fair use exception from artistic works such as sculptures, paintings and calligraphies displayed in “outdoor public places” to those displayed in any “public place”, which will cover indoor places such as museums, exhibition halls. In addition, the statutory licence is now limited to approved print publications and identical digital editions. Online reprinting and content sharing between internet platforms are expressly excluded and require authorisation and payment. Read the revised SPC judicial interpretation in Chinese

2.2 Supreme People’s Procuratorate signs memorandum to promote IP protection in arts sector

On 24 August, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP) and the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles (CFLAC) signed a memorandum of cooperation to strengthen IP protection in the arts sector. The memorandum establishes a regular consultation mechanism on IP protection and allows CFLAC to refer significant criminal, civil, administrative and public interest litigation matters to the SPP. CFLAC will also assist procuratorial authorities in verifying artistic works and identifying rights holders where needed. Particular focus will be given to key artistic works, platform-related infringement and AI-related IP disputes. The cooperation will also cover representative case publications, resource sharing, legal education and professional training. Read full announcement from CFLAC in Chinese

3. CASE HIGHLIGHT

3.1 SPC clarifies the legal consequences of breaching the Category III declaration during patent linkage

On 6 August, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) ruled on a generic drug company’s breach of a Category III declaration by which the company confirmed a listed patent exists, and will not market the generic drug until the patent expires. However, while the patent was still valid, the generic company sought listing on procurement platforms and promoted the product after obtaining marketing approval. The innovator drug company therefore requested an injunction to withdraw the procurement listings. Upon examination, the SPC held that this conduct breached the principle of good faith but did not automatically constitute patent infringement. The Court clarified that a Category III declaration is not an admission that the product falls within the patent’s scope. For this reason, the court dismissed the injunction claim. However, the court has referred the case to the drug administration to issue administrative penalties for the violation of the declaration, and suggested the innovator drug company may initiate a separate patent infringement case to claim civil damages or even punitive damages. The decision is important because Chinese law does not expressly address the consequences of false or inaccurate generic drug declarations, and it confirms that a breach alone does not justify a patent infringement injunction. Read more on the case from SPC in Chinese

3.2 SAMR publishes example trade secret cases featuring AI assets and employee breaches

On 20 August, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) published six representative trade secret infringement cases highlighting the growing importance of trade secret protection. A key theme was the role of insiders, with five out of the six cases involving current or former employees who misused confidential information obtained through their employment. Another notable characteristic is the increasing recognition of non-traditional forms of intellectual assets as trade secrets. In these cases, regulators recognised a wide variety of protectable information, including AI prompt engineering frameworks, algorithmic review rules, integrated AI operational solutions, unpublished film and television scripts, technical workflows and specialised production methods.  Several cases also demonstrate that trade secret protection is increasingly being used as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, patent protection. One case involved a former employee who attempted to patent his employer’s confidential technology. Another involved former employees who publicly disclosed technical secrets through patent applications. Read more on the cases from SAMR in Chinese

4. STATISTICS

4.1 SAMR data highlights rising scale of trade secret protection in China

On 18 August, the SAMR released statistics highlighting the growing scale of commercial secret protection efforts. Market regulators investigated 383 trade secret infringement cases between 2024 and August 2026, while prosecutors reviewed 488 criminal cases involving 1,242 individuals between 2023 and June 2026. Many of these cases concerned strategic sectors such as semiconductors, high-end equipment, new energy and advanced materials, reflecting increased use of criminal enforcement where core technologies are involved. SAMR also reported significant expansion of the national commercial secret protection pilot programme that aims to strengthen institutional innovation, improve working mechanisms and enhance regulatory enforcement, with 46 regions designated as national innovation pilot areas across three batches. Read the full transcript of the SAMR press conference in Chinese

If you would like any further information on any of the above matters or to discuss Embassy support for your company in China, contact Leo Zhuang (Leo.Zhuang@fcdo.gov.uk).