We have to send the verification link to your mailbox, please check and verify
Did not receive verification mail? Please confirm whether the mailbox is correct or not Re send mail

IPR Daily Interview with Former Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Randall Ray Rader

IPR Daily

2023-07-05 19:48:28

Camila - IPRDAILY: Hello Judge Rader, I am glad to have the opportunity to talk to you. How do you feel about teaching at Tsinghua University Law School as an honorary professor?

Randall Ray Rader: The students are incredibly intelligent. They understand very well, ask questions and provide thoughtful responses that make me feel proud for them. They haven't had a lot of work experience yet, but they're preparing for that and will be wonderful contributors to the employers. I have been teaching at Tsinghua for about 15 years, and have got many students who work for ZTE, Huawei, law firms, the Supreme People's Court, and other organizations, where they have made contributions significantly.

Camila - IPRDAILY: What lessons do you teach in Qinghua University? What will you be your teaching direction in the future?

Randall Ray Rader: I instruct in the patent law. I covered a variety of technical issues, including design, patents, licensing, procedures, rules, and standard essential patents. The training is updated annually due to changes in the legislation. Although I always change my courses, basically I teach the same contents.

Camila - IPRDAILY: What do you think of the development status of China's intellectual property industry in recent years?

Randall Ray Rader: From my perspective, it is going better. China has advanced significantly in recent years. A new trade secrets statute has been established which operates very well. They have implemented effective modifications to the current patent system, such as a patent linking system for the pharmaceutical industry, which has seen many positive developments. They also improve the trademark regime that no longer tolerates trademarks used in bad faith. Overall, there have been a wide variety of significant modifications.

Camila - IPRDAILY: What do you think is the biggest difference in the judicial concept of intellectual property between China and the United States?

Randall Ray Rader: This is a big topic. Some of China's doctrines are more effective than the US. Damages would be one area where China might learn from the US, as the Chinese concepts are simpler to foresee and apply in the US than patent eligibility. China awards of statutory damages, which are sometimes relatively little and inadequate compared to the value of the intellectual property, especially in the case of patents, indicate that their damages are frequently not entirely compensating.

I think it's one of the areas where China could still improve by taking time to learn the value of technology. And for that, specialists will be needed to assist the economic experts before the court. This would be a great contribution to the Chinese system in a positive way.

When I spoke with Chinese specialists, they all agreed that moving in that direction would be an improvement. It's difficult for the courts that statutory damages are straightforward, but it is more difficult to engage in an actual appraisal assessment. It would be beneficial if China had economic specialists who could assess the contribution technology provides to the market.

Camila - IPRDAILY: Specialist is one thing, I think the market also needs certain formal businesses to perform such tasks. Will this kind of company indulge in this evaluation of statutory damages in the US?

Randall Ray Rader: Yes, many different companies use this as their full-time employment. They evaluate licenses as well as patents and trademarks to determine their worth.

Camila - IPRDAILY: In today's globalized economy, cross-border intellectual property disputes are frequent. How do you view this issue?

Randall Ray Rader: It strikes me as a good thing. It signifies that we are utilizing and pursuing the most advanced technologies. It will lead to disputes, which means we are implementing the progress of science. I looked at conflicts as a sign of success because we are frequently installing the greatest technology, which prompts us to examine who gets credit for it, which leads to arguments that are addressed. And we're still working to move forward with the next generation of technology.

I assume that the major large corporations like Apple or Google are the ones that get sued the most. You must employ the most progressive technology to be successful. That will result in disagreements, as I said.

The most successful companies are those that are involved in most disagreements. It is always possible to avoid disagreements. But we're human. When we resolve such issues, it leads to more collaboration and shared efforts, and good things might result from them.

Camila - IPRDAILY: In today's globalized economy, cross-border intellectual property disputes are frequent. How do you view the impact of the China-US 337 disputes and US export controls on international trade and intellectual property protection?

Randall Ray Rader: The two biggest marketplaces in the world are in our two nations. And I believe it would be advantageous for both if we could find ways to cooperate by collaborating on trade concerns. Although there will always be certain differences between our two markets, but collaboration benefits us both. Export restrictions often include the government interfering with the market and the export market to impose its own policies. There are crucial policies that governments will always have. Now, the trend has been more to separate in two markets. In my opinion, that doesn't benefit the consumer in either country. The consumer benefits from more efficient uses of labor and resources that can be done through trade governments often, as I mentioned, impose limits on that trade. The more we cooperate, the better it is for Chinese and US consumers.

I understand that people's prejudices about China provide challenges. It is a dilemma for the US market since it reduces our employment and productivity while simultaneously creating new jobs and possibilities. Even while we compete with one another in many ways and both are significant nations, there are still certain areas where we can work together and others we cannot.

Camila - IPRDAILY: Do you think that unified intellectual property protection laws might be created to settle international intellectual property disputes?

Randall Ray Rader: Moving towards a harmonized system, where the rules are more comparable and businesses don’t need to have separate responses to this to problems in different nations because the laws are different, is something I would highly encourage. Therefore, it is challenging to create a global system of unified intellectual property regulation.

Camila - IPRDAILY: It is reported that you are also a core member of the Board of Directors of the US-China IP Exchange & Development Foundation. When did you join the foundation?

Randall Ray Rader: Understanding one another better, including cultures, laws, and economies, can improve our ability to cooperate. I notice that the foundation is working in that area, educating, teaching, and improving cooperation opportunities. I was there when it was founded, I've been there for many years.

Camila - IPRDAILY: What role do you think the foundation will play in the development of intellectual property exchanges between China and the United States in the future?

Randall Ray Rader: I believe that the foundation can assist in uniting individuals, provide them opportunities to interact and learn from one another, and then help them work together to improve laws and regulations. I'm quite sure that we had 47 webinars in the US, as well as maybe years ago in China.

Camila - IPRDAILY: We learnt recently that DJI is facing 337 investigations in the US market and DJI announced that they may quit the US market. Do you think the US market will be impacted by frequent 337 investigations?

Randall Ray Rader: It enforces the rules and makes sure that everyone is playing by them, which I believe helps the US market by ensuring that imports are not infringed on our customers' intellectual property rights. They protect our innovations and inventions. I'm not really commenting specifically on that particular case, I just brought up the broad concept. These litigations can promote proper practice.

Camila - IPRDAILY: What advice do you have for the Chinese companies who might face the 337 investigations?

Randall Ray Rader: Of course, I would urge them to consult with a qualified attorney. Usually, you can modify your product to work around any intellectual property issues. Or you can somehow increase your chances of winning those instances. Therefore, I would strongly advise them to carefully plan so that they can win at the ITC.

Camila - IPRDAILY: Do you think that the Chinese companies should be cautious when they enter the US market?

Randall Ray Rader: Any business that expands into a new market must conduct extensive research to ensure that its operations will be free from legal restrictions. Semiconductor is a good example, but I'd like to see China take a bigger leadership in developing pharmaceuticals. They have potential here with magnificent universities and research capabilities. I hope China develops cures for major diseases.

Camila - IPRDAILY: Thank you for your time today! 

Randall Ray Rader: You are welcome!

Source: IPR Daily

Editor: IPR Daily-Ann

    I also said the two sentence
    Also you can enter 140words
    I want to comment.
    Also you can enter 70 words