IP disputes—especially technology-intensive cases such as patents and integrated circuit layout designs—are highly professional and technically complex. Case-handlers often understand the law but not the technology. To bridge technical fact-finding between administrative and judicial branches, five Chinese authorities—the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA), the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, and the State Administration for Market Regulation—jointly issued the Opinion on Strengthening the Coordination of Intellectual Property Appraisal Work (hereinafter the “Opinion”). Based on the official policy interpretation, this article outlines its background, overall objectives, and core content under China’s IP system.
1. Background: technical fact-finding as a key link in IP protection
IP protection is a systemic project requiring legal, administrative, economic, technological, and social-governance measures to build a “grand protection” framework. IP appraisal is an important link that provides a scientific basis for administrative and judicial case-handling and improves protection efficacy.
With rapid advances in AI, ICT, and biomedicine, difficult and complex IP cases keep rising, and appraisal plays a growing role in ascertaining technical facts. The Outline of the National IP Power Construction (2021–2035), the 14th Five-Year Plan for IP Protection and Application, and the Opinions on Strengthening IP Protection all call for stronger IP appraisal. To implement these decisions, the five authorities jointly formulated the Opinion.
2. Overall objectives
The Opinion emphasizes fully implementing the spirit of the 20th CPC National Congress, deepening the IP power outline and IP protection opinions, and advancing CNIPA’s Guidance on Strengthening IP Appraisal Work. Its goals are to build a sound IP appraisal system, improve appraisal quality and credibility, and deepen coordination between IP enforcement agencies and judicial organs.
3. The Opinion in ten articles: core content
(a) Definition of IP appraisal
The Opinion defines IP appraisal as the activity in which an appraiser uses science, technology, or specialized knowledge to identify and assess professional technical issues in the administrative and judicial protection of IP, and provides an appraisal opinion—anchored on “professional technical issues.”
(b) Scope of appraisal
Appraisal mainly resolves professional technical issues in disputes over patents, trademarks, geographical indications, trade secrets, integrated circuit layout designs, and other IP, covering the objects under Article 123 of China’s Civil Code.
(c) Nature of appraisal opinions
Consistent with the three procedural laws, an appraisal opinion may serve as a basis for ascertaining facts only after it is verified true and its procedure is lawful.
(d) Coordination mechanisms among the five authorities (Articles 4–8)
Articles 4–8 establish consultation and information-sharing mechanisms among the five authorities, jointly strengthen training of institutions and appraisers, promote specialization and standardization, and reinforce self-regulation.
(e) Roster and cross-recommendation (Article 7)
Article 7 builds a selection and recommendation mechanism and a publicly available roster of IP appraisal institutions that implement the appraisal standards, for use by administrative, judicial, and arbitration/mediation bodies. It promotes cross-recommendation and sharing, with a mutual feedback mechanism on the practice of institutions and appraisers.
(f) Self-regulation and joint punishment (Article 8)
Article 8 emphasizes self-regulation and handling of violations by appraisers or institutions—strengthening integrity systems, complaint handling, and incentive/discipline mechanisms. Serious breaches such as gross negligence causing major loss, refusal to testify after lawful court notice, or intentional false appraisal may trigger joint punishment; criminal liability is pursued where applicable.
(g) Interpretation and effect (Articles 9–10)
Article 9 assigns interpretation to the five authorities; Article 10 provides that the Opinion took effect on 22 November 2022.
4. Practical takeaways
- Value appraisal in technology disputes: it is a key tool to clarify technical facts in administrative adjudication, enforcement, or litigation;
- Choose compliant institutions: the public roster helps select standardized, standards-compliant appraisers;
- Integrity is the bottom line: appraisers and institutions are accountable for their opinions; false appraisal carries credit and criminal liability;
- Administrative-judicial synergy: coordination makes technical-fact findings more consistent and predictable.
FAQ
What is IP appraisal (知识产权鉴定)?
IP appraisal refers to the activity in which an appraiser uses science, technology, or specialized knowledge to identify and assess professional technical issues involved in the administrative and judicial protection of intellectual property, and provides an appraisal opinion. It provides a scientific basis for authorities handling difficult and complex cases.
Which areas of IP does appraisal mainly cover?
Appraisal is mainly used to resolve professional technical issues in disputes over patents, trademarks, geographical indications, trade secrets, integrated circuit layout designs, and other types of IP, covering the objects specified in Article 123 of China’s Civil Code.
What evidential effect does an IP appraisal opinion have?
An appraisal opinion may serve as a basis for ascertaining case facts only after it is verified as true and its procedure is lawful. It is a professional technical reference, distinct from the final decision of an administrative or judicial authority.
What is the IP appraisal institution roster?
Under Article 7 of the Opinion, a roster of IP appraisal institutions is established; institutions that implement the IP appraisal standards are included in the publicly available roster for selection by administrative agencies, judicial organs, arbitration and mediation organizations, etc. Cross-recommendation and sharing are promoted, with a mutual feedback mechanism on the practice of institutions and appraisers.
Sources
- China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA), Policy Interpretation: Opinion on Strengthening the Coordination of Intellectual Property Appraisal Work (2022-11-29): source
Source: China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). This article is an interpretive overview based on official content and is for reference only, not an official interpretation or legal advice. This article introduces the intellectual property system of the People’s Republic of China (China); for specifics, please refer to the latest official regulations.
Related: China IP fee watch; China trademark classes.