Thesis: Paper Tiger or Roaring Dragon, China’s TRIPs Implementations and Enforcement

Posted on September 6, 2007 by Dr. Danny Friedmann

Thesis by Danny Friedmann,
thesis advisor Professor P. Bernt Hugenholtz, Professor Peter K. Yu:
Paper Tiger or Roaring Dragon
China’s TRIPs Implementations and Enforcement

Abstract:
Thesis about whether China’s IPR enforcement laws are TRIPs compliant.

At least on paper most of China’s IPR procedural laws are compliant with specific TRIPs provisions. China’s IPR laws are certainly non-compliant to the more general provisions of TRIPs, due to incompatible extra-judicial factors. Nevertheless, no unequivocal preference for a WTO case against China can be given. Another option, although more complicated, to tackle China’s IPR enforcement challenges is to be preferred: to address China’s transparency, market access, uniform application of law, integrity and impartiality of the courts and expertise in and respect for IPR.

Read the thesis here (pdf). Your comments are very welcome at ipdragon at gmail dot com.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Thesis: Paper Tiger or Roaring Dragon, China’s TRIPs Implementations and Enforcement

  1. thesis proposal says:
    March 15, 2011 at 11:16 am

    I visit this blog so many time,and every time i get some new tips and ideas from your blog, great work.

  2. Kempton says:
    July 4, 2008 at 3:18 pm

    Thanks a lot for posting your thesis online. And also mentioning Prof. Peter Yu’s recent talk at Hong Kong U.

  3. Sampsung X. Shi says:
    September 17, 2007 at 10:12 am

    And I like the cover of your thesis very much.. 🙂

  4. Sampsung X. Shi says:
    September 17, 2007 at 10:11 am

    Maybe, due to “incompatible extra-judicial factors”, China’s IPR laws is non-compliant (I presume it’s correct). However, such a problem of enforcement of law is suffered not only by IPR laws, but any other laws. That’s, any law in China has been sticking with “incompatible extra-judicial factors”!So, is it fair to ask China to give more priority to the enforcement of “IPR” laws? I’d like to take labor law, price law, administration licensing law as priority!What I want to say about this thesis is that the arguement, “China’s IPR laws are certainly non-compliant to TRIPs”, can not be supported by a universal defects of China’s law enforcement system. So, technically speaking, I wound’t buy the arguement in this essays.Moreover, I won’t deny there are lots of things need to be done in China, including inprove the enforcement of laws.

  5. TR says:
    September 16, 2007 at 4:56 pm

    Congrats Danny! It is very interesting thesis.

Comments are closed.