The Intellectual Property Court pointed out in a civil litigation against trademark infringement that the exclusive license should be limited to the situations where the trademark owner will not use the licensed trademark.

According to the Trademark Act, the exclusive licensee is entitled to take legal actions against trademark infringement as the trademark owner may take.

According to Article 3, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 11 of the Copyright Act, an "adaptation" refers to the creation of another work based on a pre-existing work by translation, musical arrangement, revision, filming, or other means.

The IP Court's decision was reversed and remanded by Taiwan's Supreme Court.

One feature of Taiwan's Patent Law (and its entire IP laws) that many patentees find interesting is the lack of indirect infringement.

Based on the judgments rendered by the IP Court after the aforementioned Supreme Court decision, the IP Court has not changed its practice. However, subsequent development of court practice remains to be seen.

The Intellectual Property Court ("IP Court") rendered ruling No. 2015-MZK-7 granting an application for a preliminary injunction order ("PIO") on October 2, 2015.

In a recent decision, the Taiwan IP Court rendered a new perspective on the test of determining whether a Taiwan court has jurisdiction over a foreign defendant whose products are sold to Taiwan via its website.

The Copyright Act in Taiwan, stipulating that "the author of a work shall enjoy copyright upon completion of the work," adopts the principle that copyright is vested automatically.

IP warranty & indemnity clauses are legal tools often used by buyers to manage and distribute supply chain risks, in particular IP litigation and associated financial hazards in connection with the seller's products ...

Whether and to what extent is a foreign forum selection clause enforceable?

Turning down a license request is, as a matter of fact, a way of exercising patent right at the choice of the patentee.

Regular readers of this column may agree that, generally speaking, Taiwan's judges are open to new legal theories bred in other jurisdictions, especially when it comes to tech laws.

On May 14, 2024, the Criminal Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court rendered its 113-Tai-Shang-Da-Zi-4096 ruling, providing a unified interpretation regarding...

Rights holders looking at Asia-Pacific enforcement budgets often have to make hard decisions about where to take action.

The Taiwan Supreme Court has issued a powerful judgment (Burberry v. ETMall, 2025) that offers significant new direction for the calculation of trademark infringement damages.

In a newsletter published at the end of 2020 on our website, we reported on two IP & Commercial Court (the IPC Court) decisions rendered in 2020, both holding that...

Taiwan's legal system bears an obvious imprint of the Continental Law.

Post-employment covenants not to compete (CNC) are lawful in Taiwan if the following four requirements set in the Labor Standards Act (LSA) are met...

Taiwan’s legal system offers several useful tools for taking action against infringers in technology cases that offer good value for rights holders willing to think flexibly. With the decriminalization of patent infringement over the past several years, purely civil patent claims can be effective but do not have the strength of a combined assault on the infringer using patent, copyright, attachment of assets, trade-secrets, fair-trade, contract and import/export laws. When possible, we recommend