A key theme in the evolution of IP in China is high-quality development. China continues to experience legislative changes, and courts are actively shaping the IP environment through new judgments.

Amendment to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (AUCL)

After a multi-year drafting process, China enacted a sweeping update to the AUCL on 27 June 2025 (effective 15 October 2025). This reform was driven by the need to address new unfair competition issues arising in the digital economy, and to enhance the deterrence.

The 2025 revision explicitly extends protection to certain new identifiers, such as social media account handles, app names and website names/domain names, from misappropriation. The AUCL clarifies that the use of another’s registered trade mark, or an unregistered well-known trade mark, as part of one’s own enterprise name in a way likely to mislead consumers constitutes unfair competition. Using competitors’ famous trade marks as keywords for search engine marketing, to divert traffic, is explicitly regarded as an unfair practice as well. However, courts hold differing opinions over the use of trade marks as keywords, with some considering this as unfair competition while others ruled it as non-infringing.

Finally, the long-arm jurisdiction under Article 40 of the revised law is worthy of attention as it introduces extraterritorial application – ie, acts of unfair competition committed outside China that disrupt the domestic market or harm Chinese businesses or consumers still fall within the law’s scope, and one can bring a lawsuit in China. How this provision plays out in practice will be a key focus in the near future.

New jurisdictional rules for internet courts

Effective 1 November 2025, the scope of jurisdiction of the three specialised internet courts will change substantially. Online copyright infringement, infringement of personal rights and online product liability disputes will no longer be heard by internet courts. Instead, internet data disputes and unfair competition disputes within Beijing, Hangzhou and Guangzhou will go to the respective internet courts. This change has been made to ensure new, cutting-edge, and complex online cases are heard by the internet courts, as per the reason for setting up such courts in the first place.

Trends in patents and trade secrets

Patent fights are common in new energy industries with keen competition for customers, such as solar and batteries. Chinese suppliers are suing each other not only domestically but also globally – eg, the global flight between JinKo and LONGi. In a landmark win for our firm, the leading battery manufacturer Zhuhai CosMX successfully overturned an RMB30M verdict in favour of its competitor ATL through appeal to the PRC Supreme People’s Court (SPC), which, in an unprecedented move, convened a five-judge panel.

Concerning trade secrets, in a case involving the infringement of “centrifugal compressor selection”, the SPC applied punitive damages and awarded RMB160 million against defendants who covertly established a competing enterprise and misappropriated their former employer’s trade secrets for more than a decade. In an apremilast patent linkage matter, the SPC facilitated the establishment by drug regulators of a pathway for changing the patent declaration type for generic drugs.

Criminal enforcement for trade secrets saw two particularly consequential matters. First, the Shanghai No 3 Intermediate People’s Court convicted 14 defendants of infringing trade secrets, handing down a six-year prison term and a fine of RMB3 million against the founder in relation to core Wi‑Fi chip technologies independently developed by HiSilicon, with an assessed value of approximately RMB317 million. In a separate case, HiTHIUM – reportedly the world’s third-largest energy storage battery maker – disclosed that its director of the office of the president and head of engineering was subjected to compulsory criminal measures by police in Ningde, Fujian, on suspicion of trade secret infringement following a report by industry leader CATL.

Emerging areas

AI-related cases have attracted a lot of attention from the courts. While Beijing Internet Court issued the first ruling acknowledging the copyrightability of AI-generated artwork in 2024, the threshold of originality remains a subject of dispute.

In March 2025, GEN Law successfully defended a case where the alleged artwork was created using very simple prompts. The People's Court of Zhangjiagang City found that images generated using AI tools may not qualify for copyright protection when the generation process is excessively simple and straightforward.

In March 2025, the Beijing IP Court ruled on the first legally effective judgment in China protecting the structure and parameters of an AI model, concluding that AI model structures and parameters developed through data training and optimisation confer innovation advantages and business value.

In November 2025, Shanghai local courts issued two judgments addressing how prompts affect copyrightability and distinguishing between pre-trained large language models (LLMs) and those trained through user data (in the context of fair use).

Chinese patent authorities and courts are grappling with the patentability of AI and software inventions. In December 2024, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released the Guidelines for AI-Related Invention Patent Applications (Trial), aiming to standardise examination standards in the AI domain. The draft addresses core issues such as the linkage between algorithmic and technical features, and recognises technical contribution. It explicitly clarifies that AI systems themselves cannot be named as inventors.

Protection of new plant varieties has been a noteworthy bright spot, even though disputes in this area represent a small share of the IP docket. In a guidance case involving a corn variety owned by the French company Limagrain, the SPC reversed the first-instance judgment, applied punitive damages and awarding the rights holder over RMB50 million in economic losses – the highest damages award to date in a plant variety infringement case in China.

Continuous crackdown on bad-faith filings and infringement

In 2025, China’s IP authorities have continued to focus on fraudulent filings. In 2024, trade mark filings dropped 7% year on year, and the approval rate rose from 61% to 71% , indicating fewer bad-faith or low-quality filings. Thousands of squatted trade marks (eg, those exploiting celebrity names or hot terms) were rejected or cancelled. Patent examiners likewise cracked down on the duplicate low-value filings that some entities mass-produce to game subsidy programmes.

In 2025, China’s IP landscape has bene characterised by a more robust legal framework, tougher enforcement and forward-looking policies for digital and green innovation. Enterprises benefit from fairer competition and better protection, but must adapt to stricter compliance and evolving risks. Success will depend on integrating IP into the core strategy, staying up to date with law and policy, and building a culture of respect for innovation and fair play.