How many misunderstandings about intellectual property rights do people in China have? (Part 1)
Incorrect translation of "intellectual property"
Ma Weiye said that to speed up the transformation of the economic development model, it is necessary to improve both hard and soft strengths: hard strength is mainly to enhance independent innovation capabilities ;Soft power is the optimization achieved through independent innovation. The ability of independent innovation is mainly reflected in the invention patents owned, and the independent innovation environment is increasingly reflected in the optimization of intellectual property culture.
However, many people are not clear about what intellectual property is. Scholars including government, economic, scientific and technological, cultural, and even intellectual property circles often refer to "knowledge" in intellectual property. ” is confused with the “knowledge” of the knowledge economy.
Intellectual property has two concepts in English: Intellectual Property (IP for short) and Intellectual Property Right (IPR for short).
These two concepts are different, but they are both translated into four words by scholars in mainland China: intellectual property. The Chinese meanings of the three English words (Intellectual Intelligence, Property, and Right) do not refer to knowledge at all, but to intelligence and wisdom.
Taiwan’s translation is relatively accurate, translating IP into intellectual property and IPR into intellectual property rights.
The English word for "knowledge" is Knowledge, which refers to knowledge, cognition, knowledge, and learning that has public knowledge. "Knowledge" cannot be property rights due to its public knowledge. If Zhang San learned "Newton's Three Laws", Li Si would not be able to learn it.
The "wisdom" in Taiwanese translation refers to the ability to acquire and apply knowledge through non-public knowledge. Only when this ability is used well can it be property rights. Knowledge is dead, only wisdom is alive. Dead knowledge is worthless without the use of living wisdom.
There are many legends in China, such as "Mulan", which show that Chinese people have much richer knowledge than Americans. But the Americans made "Mulan" and China's national treasure giant panda into cartoons and sold them all over the world. It shows that we are not as smart as Americans.
It can be seen that under the intellectual property system, wisdom is far more important than knowledge. When Chinese people accept new concepts, they are often accustomed to taking the name as the name implies. Many people take it for granted that intellectual property is “property-based knowledge” when they see it. This is extremely inaccurate.
To accurately understand the essential meaning of intellectual property rights, you must not take it as the name suggests. You should understand that intellectual property rights are legal rights for intellectual achievements, not knowledge.
And I think that "intellectual property rights" is a very bad translation, and it has been misleading the Chinese people and even senior leaders.
“Patent” is an excellent translation of the English word “Patient”. The patent system is a system in which inventions are disclosed in exchange for monopoly.
The United Kingdom was the first country to implement patents. The exclusive rights certificate issued by the king is called an invention rights certificate. The characteristics of a "patent" patient are openness and monopoly. On the premise that the invention is disclosed, the inventor's monopoly on his invention is guaranteed.
"Intellectual property" was created by scholars from mainland China 30 years ago; the word "patent" existed thousands of years ago. In ancient Chinese, "patent" refers to pursuing private interests and monopolizing interests.
The misunderstanding of "independent innovation"
In recent years, the terms "independent intellectual property rights" and "independent innovation" have become widely popular throughout the country.
"Autonomy" means that you can make the decision yourself. "Independent innovation" has three meanings: original innovation, integrated innovation, introduction, digestion, absorption and re-innovation.
Introduction, digestion, absorption, and re-innovation show that "independent innovation" does not exclude other people's things, nor is it equal to the "independence and self-reliance" advocated at that time.
"Independent intellectual property rights" refers to having exclusive exclusive rights. Exclusive rights can be obtained through multiple channels: you can innovate independently, you can buy it with money, or you can give it as a gift from others. "Independent innovation" and "independence" of "independent intellectual property rights" are two unrelated concepts.
"Independent innovation" costs money. And many small and medium-sized enterprises cannot afford high R&D expenses. "Independent innovation" also requires cost. If the purchase cost is much lower than R&D, why “independent innovation” is needed? Therefore, enterprises must not only learn to innovate independently, but also learn to purchase, introduce and cooperate.
Letting intellectual property rights work for us is the highest level for an enterprise to implement its intellectual property strategy.
The results of "independent innovation" do not equal "independent intellectual property rights". In other words, creation does not equal ownership. Without legal protection, the results created are nothing more than publicly known technologies that everyone can use free of charge. Only when protected by law can the results of inventions and creations be exclusive, and enterprises can truly have "independent intellectual property rights."
Exclusivity is a very important characteristic of intellectual property, and it is precisely this that enables intellectual property to become the core competitiveness of enterprise competition. Because it is impossible for any company to use scientific and technological achievements that are not protected by law to attack opponents and prevent others from imitating them.
The misunderstanding of "owning independent intellectual property rights"
"Intellectual property rights" are private rights. What Zhang San owns, Li Si can no longer own. "Having autonomy" is a repeated expression of the same concept. Linguistically it seems very wordy.
The term "independent intellectual property rights" is also ridiculous. Although "intellectual property rights" is poorly translated, its private nature indicates that any "intellectual property rights" are "independent property rights." Since there is no "non-independent intellectual property rights", how can there be "independent intellectual property rights"?
"Independent intellectual property rights" was probably proposed by the scientific and technological circles, not the intellectual property circles.
The "independent intellectual property rights" proposed by the scientific and technological circles have also become one of the national strategies. If we do not improve our ability to innovate independently, we will never be able to change our passive situation of being controlled by others.
In order to highlight the importance of "independent innovation", the scientific and technological community added "independent" in front of "intellectual property" after the "independent innovation" results were authorized by the Intellectual Property Office. Two words. This is probably the origin of the term “independent intellectual property rights” that is widely spread throughout the country.
If you want to truly understand "intellectual property rights", the word "independence" is really not necessary.
The value of “intellectual property”
“Intellectual property” is valuable. According to reports, iPhones are only produced in China, but Apple takes away 58.5% of the profits, while the Chinese get a pitiful 1.8%. This is equivalent to Cook earning more than 1 million US dollars per day, which is equivalent to more than 6.5 million yuan. A famous LV bag sells for tens of thousands of yuan, and the leather used to produce LV bags costs dozens of yuan per square meter. They all reflect the value of intellectual property.
Intellectual property rights are a symbol of economic development, social progress, human civilization and cultural prosperity, and are the lifeline of enterprises. Promising companies should learn to build intellectual property barriers.
For example, the value of a trademark. The Coca-Cola trademark is worth more than $70 billion. An American company learned from Apple's iPad trademark experience and registered more than 60 trademarks with the Chinese Trademark Office before entering the Chinese market.
The value of patents is far greater than the value of scientific and technological achievements. In 2009, a leader of a company in Guiyang told me that their company had applied for one patent every day for four consecutive years because it had learned lessons. Their products are sold overseas. In cooperation with foreign businessmen, to prove that they are the company with the strongest technological innovation capabilities in China, they have presented more than 20 award certificates, including the first-class National Science and Technology Progress Award certificate obtained at the Great Hall of the People. Foreign businessmen cannot understand: "The market has the final say on whether technology is advanced or not. Why does the Chinese government have the final say?" my country's science and technology reward system was learned from the Soviet Union. At present, there are probably no science and technology reward systems in the world. Only China.
They quickly took out several patent certificates issued by the State Intellectual Property Office. The foreigners' attitude changed drastically when they saw it, and the cooperation went very smoothly. One foreign businessman even paid an extra US$2 million to this Guiyang company as a sign of appreciation. Respect for its intellectual property rights: "What are the standards for your National Science and Technology Progress Award and what means did you use to obtain it? We neither know nor are we interested in finding out. It is remarkable that you can obtain these patents, because whether invention patents can be authorized , it is a unified standard all over the world. It should not be authorized, even if you use all unfair means, you cannot get it."
The value of patents is sometimes higher than the value of trademarks. This is also the reason why Beijing-based Wang Mazi and Hangzhou-based Zhang Xiaoquan, two scissor brands that have been famous for more than 300 years, closed down. They were defeated by Guangzhou Yangjiang Shibazi, which was founded in 1983. Yangjiang Shibazi applied for a large number of patents, continuously expanded the market through authorized patents, and monopolized the market, eventually squeezing Wang Mazi and Zhang Xiaoquan out of the market.
This example shows that intellectual property rights are important to enterprises, but patents are the most valuable intellectual property rights for enterprises, especially innovative and technology-dependent enterprises.
The CEO of a company once asked me: "What is the relationship between trademarks and patents?" I casually told him: "Trademarks are your 'business cards' and patents are your 'chips'." He said this The words suddenly dawned on him.
/html/01/597101-1673569.html