Dr. Tian Lu

Books and Monographs

Local Famous Trade Marks in China: Towards Reasonable and Appropriate Governance, Maastricht University, Maastricht 2023, Dissertation. DOI

Contributions to Collected Editions, Commentaries, Handbooks and Encyclopaedias

Punitive Damages for Intellectual Property Rights Infringement in China, in: Hayleigh Bosher, Eleonora Rosati (eds.), Developments and Directions in Intellectual Property Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2023, 651 - 667.

Journal Articles

Malicious Initiation of Intellectual Property Civil Litigation in China: The Emerging Jurisprudence of the Supreme People's Court, Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property 17.1 (2027), forthcoming 01.01.2027.

• In China’s evolving intellectual property enforcement landscape, the Supreme People’s Court’s (SPC) treatment of malicious initiation of intellectual property litigation (MIIPL) provides a case study in court-driven development in the absence of a clear legislative definition. Although MIIPL was formally introduced in 2011 as a distinct case classification, it has only recently been shaped into a preliminary jurisprudential framework through SPC rulings. Drawing on all 17 substantive SPC decisions identified since then, this article reconstructs a working four-element framework of MIIPL: the absence of a valid asserted right or factual basis, conscious awareness, damage and causation. It argues that this framework operates in practice as a quasi-objective, knowledge-based test informed by general civil law principles, placing primary weight on objectively ascertainable defects and surrounding circumstances rather than on subjective malice as such. This approach reflects a judicial compromise between disciplining abusive IP enforcement and preserving legitimate access to courts. Yet the framework’s doctrinal basis remains unstable, drawing unevenly on tort liability, abuse of rights, and procedural good faith. Its future development will depend not only on further SPC rulings, but also on improved institutional coordination and, in the longer term, clearer legislative conditions governing IP litigation.

Selected Criminal Trade Mark Cases in the Annual Top Ten Intellectual Property Cases of the Supreme People’s Court of China, Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property 13, 2 (2023), 239 - 262. DOI

• Since 2009, the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) has annually reported the Top Ten Intellectual Property Cases (TTIPCs) on and around World Intellectual Property Day in April. The individual cases involve the past year’s countrywide intellectual property cases and form a key component of China’s national case guidance system. Due to their conciseness and regularity of release, as well as their role as explicit guidance provided by the SPC, the TTIPCs encompass a particularly valuable observational window into Chinese law and its applications.
  
  In contrast to holistic empirical research involving numerous cases, this study embarks on a new course by investigating the specific intersection of TTIPCs and trade mark criminal offences. A longitudinal sampling method of past TTIPCs has been used to extract all criminal trade mark cases. These cases were subsequently analysed within the prevailing social context during adjudication and the evolution of China’s trade mark criminal legislation. This study aims to reveal the characteristics, functions, and limitations of TTIPC criminal trade mark cases.

Comment on the Announcement of the Top Ten Intellectual Property Cases of 2020 in China, GRUR Int 71, 4 (2022), 346 - 352. DOI

• Since 2009, the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) has announced the Top Ten Intellectual Property Cases (TTIPCs) of the previous year in China every April on the occasion of World Intellectual Property Day. The annual TTIPCs reveal the ten cases that the SPC considers most worth emphasising among the huge number of intellectual property cases heard across China each year. Moreover, by incorporating a ‘Typical Significance’ section of each case into the announcement, the SPC explicitly points out the aspects of the cases that require particular attention for different audiences, including courts at all levels and other interested parties. For this reason, the annual TTIPCs announcement is a clear, regular and valuable signal for the yearly observation of the SPC and the intellectual property undertakings in China. Following the recently released official announcement of the 2020 TTIPCs, this Comment interprets the ten cases in terms of characteristics, significance, functions and interactions with the social context. The author aims to spark further analysis of the ten cases without prejudice to their textual value.

The Implementation of Blockchain Technologies in Chinese Courts, Stanford Journal of Blockchain Law & Policy 4.1 (2021), 102 - 120 04.01.2021.

The Case Guidance System in China: A Practical Guide to Intellectual Property Cases, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 16, 3 (2021), 207 - 212. DOI

Chinese Supreme Court Rules That Hoarding Trade Marks in Bad Faith Falls within the Scope of ‘Other Illegitimate Means', Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 14, 4 (2019), 263 - 265. DOI

Chinese Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Dior, Attaching Great Relevance to Due Process Interests of International Trade Mark Applicants, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 13, 11 (2018), 849 - 851. DOI