Intellectual property has just embarked on the plans of major e-commerce companies in the past two years. Many companies' intellectual property rights are not yet able to cover their main products, but many companies are already thinking about the layout. The layout of intellectual property has always been a hot topic in the field of intellectual property, and it is also something that company managers are very eager for.

 

In traditional cognition, the layout is roughly like this:

Patent layout-establish a patent pool, and use invention/utility model patents to establish technical barriers (refer to Baidu Encyclopedia: Patent Layout); trademark layout-covering applications, including trademark categories, related vocabulary, association vocabulary, etc.

 

In this regard, we can summarize it as: spend money！the more money, the tighter the protection.

 

However, the intellectual property layout that Harley is going to talk about today is very different from the traditional layout, because the e-commerce industry inherently has too many particularities.

 

For e-commerce companies at the current stage, Harley still only grants design layout and trademark layout (intellectual property rights include inventions, utility models, designs, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, etc.). Others, just look at it (there are many in 2020) patent infringement, e-commerce dividends finally attracted the attention of traditional American law firms). Among them, trademark layout today only talks about product trademark layout, not brand building. Let’s take a look at a set of examples about the layout of appearance patents (3M Innovation Co., Ltd.):

 

 

The most intuitive feeling is: 3M is really rich! The same product costs eight times the cost of the most "ordinary" design application. There are multiple partial applications for the same product, and only the design application makes people feel thorny all over. Compared with China's design system, many foreign countries including Europe, America and Japan have partial design application systems. Many major foreign brands can't wait to disassemble a product into individual threads for patent application (fortunately, the United States does not have a policy of halving the official fee for serial applications), so that even the design curvature of some products can be protected. This can be a very critical killer in many cases.

 

Look at another wave of trademark applications for products:

 

"Many major foreign brands can't wait to disassemble a product into a single thread for patent application, so that it can protect even the design curvature of some products." This article also applies to trademarks. Levi’s  trademark likes to do things(to combat infringement) is not a day or two. As for how to unify the layout of the appearance and trademark application, Zippo lighter is a master:

 

Regarding design, partial applications are never absent.

 

Trademark applications have been played by them in various tricks. Products of big brands often exceed the protection period of patents. Trademarks are particularly important for big-name products with ID design characteristics. In addition, there is a big difference between the novelty requirements of trademark applications and patent applications. There seems to be a lot of room for manipulation (a time to test your comprehension).

 

Harley's views on the current state of the industry

 

Many students inside and outside the industry have a kind of directional thinking when facing trademarks: trademark ≈ brand, which should be "Huawei", "Apple", "Anker", or some related design patterns, but will not associate them with the product itself. The ID design is linked together. Even after facing the ID trademark infringement of overseas products, he did not even consider how to apply it to his own products.

 

This is a limitation of thinking that currently exists in China. The root of this problem is also closely related to the organizational structure of many domestic companies. The intellectual property department is usually set up under the legal department and lacks the right to speak (Harley said that he is very lucky, but he still has a certain right to speak, thanks to the former boss). They are usually divided into the Patent Department and the Trademark Department. There is almost no communication between them. They perform their duties and know very little about each other’s fields. Even many companies’ trademark applications are not carried out by professionals (Even before seeing the recruitment information of certain companies, the recruitment needs are administrative and intellectual property rights? ? ?). The Intellectual Property Department lacks a real leader to consider the unified layout of patents and trademarks. In addition, in areas other than e-commerce, design patents are not taken seriously, and no one will consider how to integrate them with trademarks in a unified layout.

 

Intellectual property agencies are also very similar in essence. Trademarks and patents are matters of two departments. Cases entrusted to intellectual property agencies are directly handled separately. There is no such thing as a unified planning and layout. Moreover, intellectual property agency companies will make the patent and trademark classification more clear. Generally, only the boss will understand both parties, and expect the boss to plan the layout for you? Don't think about it, many bosses are investing in the prospect of intellectual property rights, and are busy with food and drink to pull business.

Summary: In e-commerce, a person in charge of intellectual property who can really do the layout, patent experience, trademark experience, and e-commerce experience are indispensable!