A guide to the CIELA online analysis tool
This page is designed to give you a better understanding of how to use the CIELA Online analysis tool and to clarify what the output information means.
Click on a topic below to jump straight to the corresponding topic.
- IPR Type
- Case types
- Industry, City, and Yearly Comparison
After logging into CIELA, you will gain access to analyse patent, trade mark, copyright, and unfair competition cases. Simply select one of the IPR types from the 'Analysis Tool' drop down menu found on every page.
Refers to cases where the courts are asked to review the decisions from the Trade Mark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) or Patent Re-examination Board (PRB). All cases are from the Beijing 1st Intermediate Court and High Court which are the only courts with jurisdiction to review an administrative decision from TRAB or PRB. Administrative appeals for Patent and Trade Mark cases are included in CIELA.
Civil infringement claims are filed through the P.R.C. court system and, if accepted, are heard by a people’s court. Infringement claims and remedies sought will be based on the relevant statutory law.
When generating a report 'Type' refers to the sub-category of the IP Right (Patent, Trade Mark, Copyright, Unfair Competition). For example, sub-categories of Patents include Invention, Utility Model and Design rights.
CIELA breaks the location down by province and municipality and then by court in that province including High People's Courts, Intermediate People's Courts, and District People's Courts.
An infringement case can be heard by any court that has jurisdiction to hear that case. Jurisdiction is governed by a set of regulations. A defendant will often challenge the jurisdiction of a given court to hear the claim. If jurisdiction is found to be inappropriate, a case may be transferred to another court.
Jurisdiction in an infringement case can be determined in one of three ways: (1) the location in which the defendant’s business is registered; (2) the location of the plaintiff whose intellectual property is being infringed; and (3) the location in which the infringement took place. The plaintiff therefore has wide latitude in selecting the location in which it files its lawsuit. This is especially true in cases involving online merchandising.
All administrative appeals are trialled in Beijing. These cases can only be filtered by court.
"Industry" refers to the industry in which the plaintiff operates and the subject matter of the case.
Each report will display a title and customised criteria based on the filters set in the side bar. The first section of the report provides high level information of the cases being analysed.
Aggregate figures of the number of cases being analysed is displayed in the report. This information is the split by Instance. "Instance" refers to the trial instance of the judgment. All judgments are either first or second instance judgments. There are not necessarily final decisions. Due to limitations in obtaining all judgments, it is possible that the first instance judgments are appealed.
"Avg Proceedings Duration" refers to the average time taken for proceedings in months from the date of acceptance of the filing of the claim to the date when that instance of the case is concluded. This figure is based on the filters set in the side bar. "Avg Duration for all IP cases" shows what the overall average duration is for all cases for that IPR type.
Court affirmance of prior PRB/TRAB decisions (administrative appeal cases only)
When analysing administrative appeals users can see a breakdown of the court's affirmance of prior Patent Re-examination Board (PRB) and Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) decisions. Affirmance percentages refer to the rate at which the courts accept the decisions made by the PRB or TRAB regarding either the granting/upholding of IP rights OR denying IP rights. The graphs segment both situations whilst also provide the number of cases analysed.
Win rate (civil infringement cases only)
This refers to all judgments where the court recognises some or all of the plaintiff’s claims for infringement and awards remedies in all or some of the categories of relief sought by the plaintiff (e.g. apology, injunction, damages and costs). N.B. a finding of infringement for the plaintiff indicates that some damages may have been awarded, but does not necessarily mean that the full amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff have been awarded by the court.
Injunction ratio (civil infringement cases only)
"Injunction Ratio" refers to the percentage of judgments in which a final injunction is awarded. Currently judgments do not contain data on either pre-trial injunctions or interim injunctions.
Apology ratio (civil infringement cases only)
"Apology Ratio" refers to the percentage of judgments in which the court orders the defendant to issue a public apology to the plaintiff (for those cases where an apology is sought by the plaintiff).
Compensation Claimed vs Awarded (civil infringement cases only)
This shows the number of cases where compensation was claimed by the plaintiff and awarded as a percentage of all cases. Hovering over the graph displays the actual number of cases as well as the average amount claimed awarded or claimed in Chinese Yuan.
Basis of compensation (civil infringement cases only)
This graph displays the basis of the different types of compensation awarded. These include: Statutory damages, Loss of profit (by the plaintiff), Illegal income (unlawful income gained by the infringer), and License base (for patent cases only and refers to a notional license fee that would have been payable to the plaintiff for the unlawful use).
The type of compensation chosen by judges as the basis for adjudication depends on the proof provided by the plaintiff (the owner of the infringed right). The plaintiff needs to cite related evidence to support three types of compensation including loss of profit, illegal income, and license base (patent cases). Statutory Damages refers to damages awarded according to the discretion of the court up to a maximum level prescribed by the relevant statute. Chinese IP statutes do not prescribe minimum levels of damages, as may be seen in other jurisdictions.
This allows the user to compare IP judgments across different industries.
The filters are automatically set by the system when comparing industries, location, and years. These may be different to the filters chosen above to make it easier for comparison. For example, the industry comparison pie chart will disregard the industry filter.
The arc length of each sector represents the number of cases for that industry. The radius length (height) represents the figure being compared (e.g. win rate, damages awarded, etc)
City comparison (civil infringement cases only)
This view allows the user to compare the top and bottom cities. Due to data restrictions, it is possible to filter by cities that have a minimum number of cases to be analysed enabling more meaningful comparisons.
This graph provides an overview of the trends dating back to 2006.