The creation of something new is not accomplished by the intellect but by the play instinct acting from inner necessity. The creative mind plays with the object it loves. [Carl Gustav Jung]
intellectual property law - law for increasingly competitive times
what is intellectual property (IP)? well, if you would have asked me at the beginning of law school, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. it wasn't much of a killer in the mid 90ies. nobody really seemed to be interested in IP, neither academic staff nor students. nowadays IP is in everybody's mouth and since several years its taking up quite a large part of my professional life. the European Commission wants to build an innovation based society until 2020, the Chinese State Council drives its nation towards domestic self-innovation (自主创新）and all governments attach high (if alas mostly faked) spending quotas to their research, development & innovation (RDI) budgets. we live in highly competitive times and the future of our living standards is secured by innovation (that's at least what the governments have been made to belief). hence there is naturally strong interest to protect innovative ideas, processes and products from being stolen. the legal framework of intellectual property was set up to provide exactly this protection.
the original telos of intellectual property law was even a bit more outreaching. not the exclusion from third parties of using an innovation-creation was the lawmaker's objective, but the reward for the innovator. the inventor of a machine, the author of a novel, the programmer of a video game, the chemist who created a drug, etc. should be rewarded for his/her investment. the rationalizing was simple: no reward, no innovation. why should somebody take the risk, make the effort, raise the funds to innovate if there was no promising return on investment? idealistic individuals would continue to invent and create, yes, but financially driven corporation? certainly not. in particular modern stock listed enterprises make decisions that are based on risk management, ROI calculations and secure investment environments. one of many factors contributing to the safety of an investment environment is the legal framework and the execution of that framework. it is the duty of national or local governments to provide these legal frameworks. some make a better some a rather poor job in this regard. and since China was since the 90ies in the focus of foreign direct investment (FDI), the interest of foreign corporations and governments grew to have their investments in the world's largest market at least on a safe legal shore.
that's where my legal studies and my China studies intersected and immediately after graduation a new direction for professional development opened up. after a brief stance in the DLA Piper CEE team in Vienna, where I was tasked to build up a China desk, I joined the government owned Austrian bank AWS as legal counsel for intellectual property law in emerging markets. during these three years I was able to gain a thorough understanding of how the IP system works and even ventured back to law school to start a JD on "bad faith utility model applications", a threat that emerged from the Chinese IP system at that time. I also acquired a profound understanding of the differences between the US and EU IP systems during a 18 months EU sponsored project, which I coordinated amongst the multilateral project partners to identify transatlantic synergies in the collaboration on IP issues. Due to a call by the Austrian Chamber of Commerce and the Ministry of Commerce to join the trade delegation and a growing frustration with the real world IP dynamics, I dropped the JD thesis and moved to Shanghai to work as technology attache at the consulate general Shanghai commercial section. Two years of working on technology transfer projects and IPR counseling eventually formed the desire to experience more corporate continuity. I left the consulate for Fronius, where I am still managing director of the group's China subsidiary, and as such amongst others also in charge of all legal and IP issues. I continue to privately advise third parties on IP related problems in China, but have formed my own, from the law and order concept quite different opinion about how intellectual property is to be dealt with. Maybe more on this here sometime later.
the original telos of intellectual property law was even a bit more outreaching. not the exclusion from third parties of using an innovation-creation was the lawmaker's objective, but the reward for the innovator. the inventor of a machine, the author of a novel, the programmer of a video game, the chemist who created a drug, etc. should be rewarded for his/her investment. the rationalizing was simple: no reward, no innovation. why should somebody take the risk, make the effort, raise the funds to innovate if there was no promising return on investment? idealistic individuals would continue to invent and create, yes, but financially driven corporation? certainly not. in particular modern stock listed enterprises make decisions that are based on risk management, ROI calculations and secure investment environments. one of many factors contributing to the safety of an investment environment is the legal framework and the execution of that framework. it is the duty of national or local governments to provide these legal frameworks. some make a better some a rather poor job in this regard. and since China was since the 90ies in the focus of foreign direct investment (FDI), the interest of foreign corporations and governments grew to have their investments in the world's largest market at least on a safe legal shore.
that's where my legal studies and my China studies intersected and immediately after graduation a new direction for professional development opened up. after a brief stance in the DLA Piper CEE team in Vienna, where I was tasked to build up a China desk, I joined the government owned Austrian bank AWS as legal counsel for intellectual property law in emerging markets. during these three years I was able to gain a thorough understanding of how the IP system works and even ventured back to law school to start a JD on "bad faith utility model applications", a threat that emerged from the Chinese IP system at that time. I also acquired a profound understanding of the differences between the US and EU IP systems during a 18 months EU sponsored project, which I coordinated amongst the multilateral project partners to identify transatlantic synergies in the collaboration on IP issues. Due to a call by the Austrian Chamber of Commerce and the Ministry of Commerce to join the trade delegation and a growing frustration with the real world IP dynamics, I dropped the JD thesis and moved to Shanghai to work as technology attache at the consulate general Shanghai commercial section. Two years of working on technology transfer projects and IPR counseling eventually formed the desire to experience more corporate continuity. I left the consulate for Fronius, where I am still managing director of the group's China subsidiary, and as such amongst others also in charge of all legal and IP issues. I continue to privately advise third parties on IP related problems in China, but have formed my own, from the law and order concept quite different opinion about how intellectual property is to be dealt with. Maybe more on this here sometime later.
| understanding_china.pdf |
| de_facto_strategies.pdf |
| patentschutz_in_exportmrkten.pdf |
| final_report_aws_en.pdf |
| ipp_technologietransfer_china.pdf |