With economic development, the role of intellectual property rights (IP) has become increasingly important in the development of software industry. It has been integrated into all aspects of software production and operation activities to respect intellectual properties and to create, apply and protect the IP rights of one's own. In 2001 the State Council issued the Document 4, in full title of “a Basket of Measures to Further Boost the Software and IC Industry”. Part VII of Document 4 provides IP policies of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection on the Internet, software copyright registration and financial support. In terms of policy implementation, it states that industry associations should give full play to their advantages in resources, promote the software IP protection and resist all IPR violations.

 

 

Piracy has been a lingering problem in the software industry and also a serious deterrent factor for industrial development. Piracy has shaken the foundation for the rapid development of software industry and hurt the enthusiasm of practitioners. Especially as the prevailing of the Internet, software IP infringement has become cheaper and more covert.

 

IP protection in a network environment is the highlight of the IP protection policies listed in Document 4. Article 27 provides that related departments should strictly implement software IP protection system and fight against all kinds of violations. To this end, industry associations should engage in more research on IP protection in network environments, actively guide software companies to develop and apply technologies for online copyright protection and effectively protect the IPR of software.

 

 

The major difficulty of software IP protection is the high cost and long period of litigation. Generally software infringement litigations are raised by the copyright owners because entities or individuals in the market sell or use identical or substantially similar software without the permission of the copyright owners. To identify the infringement, generally the right holder should first commission an authorized judiciary institution to identify, including non-public knowledge identification and identity authentication of the violators. Judicial officers do not have comprehensive information and professional information of the related parties, which leads to a complex investigation and difficulty in providing proof of the violation. Therefore, litigation may neither achieve the goal nor play the role of dispute resolution.

 

Compared with the formal legal litigation, dispute resolution platforms created by industry associations may more fully grasp the client’s case, provide effective mediation before litigation to resolve disputes and avoid litigation. The platform will help save litigation costs. IP disputes between domestic software enterprises should also use mediation channels in order to reduce internal frictions. Associations can also cooperate with the judiciary organs to improve industry credibility, promote brand management and achieve long-term development.

 

 

When entering into the international market, some Chinese software companies may encounter with challenges in the IP field. Under some circumstances, it is Chinese enterprises that own the IPRs, but are accused groundlessly by a number of foreign companies. It is very complicated to protect software IP in the international arena. On one hand, the companies should be familiar with international laws and the laws of the specific country; on the other hand, the companies should have strong financial support since IP lawsuits are time-consuming and wealth-consuming.

 

With regard to international IP issues encountered by Chinese enterprises encountered with, Article 26 of the Document 4 proposes to encourage software enterprises to engage in copyright registration and support software. IC enterprises should also apply IP in foreign countries. Enterprises meeting related requirements can also apply for financial funding. Currently some enterprises do not know about the financial funding, financial resources, requirements or application procedures. Therefore, enterprises should organize IP-related training, and publicize the government’s financial funding policies. Meanwhile, industry associations should support Chinese software enterprises in international IP protection from aspects of law, technology and finance.

 

To support software enterprises on international IP protection, Beijing Software Industry Association held a special workshop “software enterprise IPR protection strategy training”, inviting experts in the domain to explain their overseas IP early-warning strategies, patent emergency responses and what they consider to be early warnings of pending IP issues. The workshop also addressed core technology digging and commercialization. Many software companies were also invited to share IP protection experiences.