1. Difficulty in enforcing intellectual property rights
“Difficulty in enforcing the law” has always been a “stumbling block” on the road to the rule of law in my country. Although China has been in the WTO for nearly 20 years, counterfeiting, piracy, and copycat infringements are still rampant. First, it stems from the traditional Chinese cultural concept of “harmony”. People are unwilling to hurt the harmony and are unwilling to resort to law unless they have no choice. Even disputes with very simple and clear rights and obligations cannot be resolved in a timely manner; second, people’s concept of the rule of law is not strong, and the concept of rights and obligations is weak, which leads to the fact that the court’s judgment cannot be effectively implemented in many cases, and the rights and interests of the right holders cannot be effectively protected; third, the law enforcement environment is unhealthy, and personal relationships, relationships, and even the intervention of power are also realistic factors affecting law enforcement; fourth, the inaction or lack of action of the intellectual property law enforcement functional departments has become a booster for the repeated infringement of intellectual property rights.
2. The connection between administrative protection and judicial protection of intellectual property rights is not smooth
As two basic ways of legal protection of intellectual property rights, judicial protection and administrative protection play an important role in the intellectual property system. Judicial protection is a way for intellectual property rights holders to resolve disputes in accordance with the law, which is a passive law enforcement method; administrative protection is an active law enforcement method, but more cases are initiated after the administrative authorities receive applications or complaints, and there is not much initiative involved. At the same time, there are many administrative agencies for intellectual property rights in China, such as the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Information Industry, the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Culture, the General Administration of Customs, the Intellectual Property Office, etc. The administrative law enforcement powers among these departments are dispersed, resulting in serious cross-enforcement. Once an intellectual property infringement case occurs, it is difficult for the right holder to accurately judge which department to seek legal protection from, and there is even a phenomenon that the departments compete for management or do not manage, which is not conducive to the right holder to protect their rights in a timely manner.
3. The legislation of intellectual property rights is relatively lagging behind
my country’s intellectual property legislation is mainly manifested in the Copyright Law, the Trademark Law, the Patent Law, the Regulations on the Protection of Information Network Communication Rights, and the Regulations on Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights. The current legal system lacks a unified and leading intellectual property basic law, and pays too much attention to specific intellectual property protection, which is structurally incomplete. This has led to the inconsistency of legal norms and legal responsibilities, and the lack of mutual coordination and integration between various laws and regulations within the intellectual property legal system. Compared with developed countries, my country’s existing intellectual property legislation still has a large gap. The legal system for e-commerce is not yet sound, and the relevant legislation on cross-border e-commerce intellectual property protection is also incomplete, which can no longer meet the urgent requirements of cross-border e-commerce for intellectual property protection.