Recently, the China National Intellectual Property Administration ("CNIPA") issued the Reply on Matters Concerning the Criteria for Ascertaining "Intentional Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights" (the "Reply").

The Reply clarifies that, when refining the criteria for ascertaining "intentional infringement of intellectual property rights (IPRs)", attention should be paid to strengthening the IPRs protection in accordance with the law and scientifically distinguishing "intentional" and "serious circumstances", to prevent inappropriate overlap of the two constituent elements or repeat evaluation. Also, the Reply indicates that, whether the act of "intentional infringement of IPRs" should be included in the list of entities with seriously illegal and dishonest acts pursuant to Article 9 of the Administrative Measures for Lists of Entities with Seriously Illegal and Dishonest Acts for Market Regulatory Authorities (the "Measures"), should also be determined according to Article 2 of the Measures to ascertain whether a heavier administrative punishment is given for the act, and according to Article 12 of the Measures to ascertain where the act has perverse nature, serious circumstance, or greater social harm.

(Source: China National Intellectual Property Administration)