The number of trademark applications in Taiwan continues to hold steady around 65,000 each year, down from a high of 73,000 at the height of the dot-com boom in 1999.  Foreign applications make up about one-quarter of the total applications.  The US continues to be the second highest source of trademarks filed in Taiwan, with about 6 percent of the applications, above Japan’s 5 percent.

In response to concerns raised by the European Union regarding the adequacy of intellectual property protection in Taiwan, TIPO officials have recently discussed plans to protect famous trademarks when they are used as infringers’ company and store names.  The Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) has stated before that there are currently no specific procedures on how to deal with a situation in which an infringer refuses to change its company’s name even after a trademark owner wins a lawsuit against the infringer based on Article 62 of the Trademark Law. 

The MOEA is currently considering the addition of a provision to Article 10 of the Company Law that would help execute these judgments on trademark protection.  This provision would give the MOEA authority to dissolve the infringer’s company, or require the company to change its registered name.  Spokesmen for the European Commerce Department state that it hopes that the MOEA will create clear communication channels between its agencies, and have them coordinate with each other to check whether a company name infringes upon a famous trademark before approving a company name.

At its national conference, the Industry and Commerce Administration announced that, as of November 2007, trademark registrations in China increased by over 29 percent over the previous year.  The total number of trademark registrations has now reached over three million.  This year, the Trademark Office registered and certified 197 well-known or famous marks.  

Currently the China Trademark Office is handling over 700,000 trademark applications. Foreign applicants filed 103,000 trademark applications last year, which represents a 6.1 percent increase over the previous year and accounts for 14.5 percent of the total number of trademark applications in China. 

International trademark applications originating from China have also increased.  According to World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) statistics, of the 38,471 trademarks registered through the Madrid Protocol system in 2007, 1,444 were Chinese applications.  This represents an 8.7 percent increase over the 2006 figures. 

Enforcement of trademark rights in China has also increased according to latest figures.  Last year, 41,000 trademark infringement cases were investigated and 143 cases were transferred to judicial agencies for further review. 

These general trends suggest that the Chinese are becoming more aware of intellectual property rights, and indicates that the Chinese market may be primed for an influx of more products and services in the future.

In April, the National Peoples Congress Standing Committee disclosed a draft of the Food Safety Law—a revision to a decades old food safety and sanitation code—for public comment.  A final draft of the law is expected to pass in June 2008.

In response to international concerns about safety inspections on China’s food exports, the NPC drafted a law that establishes responsibility for tainted products at several levels of government, and clarifies safety codes at the State and local level.   While State and local agencies will be required to supervise safety inspections, manufacturers will be held liable for the quality of their food.  

The law imposes increased penalties for producers of tainted products.  Producers may have their manufacturing equipment and materials confiscated in addition to receiving a fine of between 10 to 20 times the cost of producing the food.  The producer’s business license can also be revoked under this new law.  One of the more startling penalties the law imposes is that producers may receive up to lifetime imprisonment for criminal charges.  The wide range of penalties allows supervising agencies great flexibility in dealing with cases of contaminated and unsafe food.

One additional provision of the law allows customers to sue producers for damages up to 10 times the sales price of the food product in addition to other damages.  This provision was added to encourage customers to report illegal activities.  However, the amount is still minimal, and middle class consumers are unlikely to find it worthwhile to sue for 10 times the price of a can of fruit, for example.