Overview

The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology is exerting a profound and growing influence on IP legal systems. The development of AI technologies across Asia-Pacific countries is characterised by vertical deepening and scenario integration, which has broadened the application of AI in conjunction with various industries. Several emerging trends are apparent. In the area of IP grant procedures, countries are expanding the scope of protectable subject matter related to AI and shortening examination and grant cycles through legislative amendments or revisions to examination standards. In the area of IP exploitation, policies are being relaxed to encourage industrial innovation related to AI technology applications. In the area of IP enforcement, a balanced approach emphasising both development and security is being adopted, with stronger protection measures for new technologies related to AI. As the most significant major power in the Asia-Pacific region, China has recently seen notable changes in IP protection in response to technological developments in the AI era. In this chapter, experienced lawyers from the IP department of Zhong Lun Law Firm draw on their frontline judicial practice experience to comprehensively review the challenges and developmental trends in patent, copyright, trade mark and trade secret protection in China in recent years.

Trade Secrets

New developments in trade secret protection

In terms of civil protection of trade secrets, since China implemented the leapfrog appeal system in 2019, the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People’s Court has made the adjudication of technical secret cases a priority. Over the past seven years, the Court has issued numerous landmark judgments in technical secret cases. These include lowering the evidentiary standard for rights-holders to establish the existence of a trade secret, extensively applying burden-of-proof shifting rules to presume infringement, imposing punitive damages for infringement of technical secrets and clarifying specific measures for ceasing infringement of technical secrets. Several judgments have awarded damages exceeding USD15 million, with the highest reaching USD90 million, demonstrating a pro-rights holder stance. Based on available data, the success rate for plaintiffs in technical secret cases before the Supreme People’s Court’s IP Court is approximately 40%, significantly higher than the success rate in local courts.

In terms of criminal protection of trade secrets, in 2025, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued the Judicial Interpretation on Handling Criminal IP Infringement Cases to specifically regulate the increasing number of technical secret criminal cases, and to guide public security agencies nationwide in investigating trade secret crime cases. The 2025 investigation by Shanghai police into a company’s infringement of Huawei’s radio frequency chip technical secrets stands out as the most influential recent trade secret criminal case. After two years of investigation and prosecution, 14 individuals were ultimately convicted.

As a crucial part of China’s unique administrative protection system, the Provisions on Trade Secret Protection (the “Provisions”) were promulgated in the first half of 2026, which signals that market regulatory authorities will become more involved in combating trade secret infringement. The Provisions document is considered the most comprehensive legal document to date in the field of trade secret protection, containing numerous forward-looking provisions that reflect robust protection for trade secret holders. Notably, they expand the scope of protectable technical secrets to include algorithms, data, computer programmes and code, as well as partial results and negative experimental data, aligning with the protection needs of enterprises in the digital economy era. Furthermore, similar to regulations in countries like Japan and South Korea, the Provisions provide for protective measures against trade secret infringement acts committed outside China, establishing a form of long-arm jurisdiction over such acts.

Overall, China has been continuously strengthening its protection of trade secrets, driven by its innovation-driven development policy in science and technology. This benefits innovative technology industries and provides strong protection for investments in new technologies. It has also been observed that the professional and complex nature of trade secret litigation presents significant challenges for parties in individual cases. Lawyers deeply versed in China’s civil, criminal and administrative trade secret protection rules, possessing comprehensive litigation and practical experience, are best placed to take the pulse of protection in this era of systemic change.

Patents

Frontline game: navigating the new landscape of collaborative patent protection in the Asia-Pacific region

As an important engine of global economic growth, the Asia-Pacific region has emerged as a pivotal hub for patent innovation and rule restructuring, with patent systems undergoing a profound transformation from independent operation within single jurisdictions to regional co-ordination and rule integration. This shift is reflected not only in the differentiated examination standards iterated by various countries to accommodate frontier technologies such as AI and biomedicine, but also in the nuanced balancing of rights protection boundaries, cross-border enforcement mechanisms and the balance of public interests.

From the perspective of patent grant and patent invalidation requests, divergent regional rules have become a primary challenge for corporate IP strategies. While all major Asia Pacific economies operate within the framework of international agreements, including the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), their patent examination standards vary significantly due to differing stages of development and industrial priorities.

In reviewing patents involving algorithms and big data, China emphasises that algorithms must have specific technical connections with the internal structure of computers, Singapore recognises the patentability of pure software when it achieves specific technical effects and Australia maintains a strict technical contribution test. India has introduced specialised guidelines governing the patent examination framework for AI, blockchain and related technologies. Against this backdrop of regulatory divergence, enterprises must transcend single-jurisdiction thinking and ensure structured design in alignment with their industrial layout to achieve the dual aims of rights protection and commercial value.

From the perspective of patent enforcement and dispute resolution, strategic competition has intensified markedly. In recent years, standard essential patent (SEP) disputes have become the core focus. China adheres to the fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) principle throughout SEP trials, Japan has issued SEP litigation guidelines proposing a four-step negotiation framework and Southeast Asian countries have established specialised IP courts, either referencing the EU framework or being influenced by US precedents, forming differentiated judicial approaches. In such a litigation landscape, the co-ordination of remedy strategies in multi-jurisdictional parallel proceedings relies on the legal team’s comprehensive expertise in substantive and procedural laws across multiple jurisdictions, as well as their ability to co-ordinate and strategise across different legal systems.

The globalisation of R&D has driven patent commercialisation, prompting countries to iterate and form differentiated compliance requirements for patent transactions. China and Korea have incorporated patents for sensitive technologies into export controls, Singapore leverages RCEP to simplify patent review for member states while strengthening the filing of sensitive technologies, and Australia has enhanced cross-oversight between patent regulation and antitrust enforcement. In this regulatory environment, enterprises should elevate patent transactions to a corporate strategic level and systematically design licensing terms and rights allocation structures tailored to individual jurisdictions.

Overall, patent protection essentially embodies the co-ordination and competition associated with the commercialisation of innovative value. When expanding into the Asia-Pacific market, enterprises must adopt a full-chain mindset to integrate patent grant, enforcement and commercialisation. By relying on professional cross-jurisdictional legal support, enterprises can maximise patent value amid rule-based games, adapt to the new landscape of collaborative protection and seize the initiative in innovative competition.

Copyright

Technological innovation is reshaping the traditional copyright protection system

In recent years, a new copyright protection ecosystem has emerged in the Asia-Pacific region, characterised by comprehensive application of AI technology, gradual improvement of legislative rules, strengthened platform responsibilities and deepened regional co-ordination. AI is no longer merely a source of copyright risks, but has become a core infrastructure for rights confirmation, monitoring and governance, facilitating the shift in copyright protection from a passive, reactive model to an intelligent, predictive and fully integrated closed-loop system.

In terms of legislation and ownership, major Asia-Pacific countries have gradually reached a consensus that human-led creation is the core premise of copyright protection, and that AI-generated content may obtain limited protection provided that it meets the requirements of being human-led and original, although it must be labelled with its source. Recently, Vietnam and South Korea have revised their IP/copyright laws, while China and Indonesia have improved supporting rules.

In terms of right confirmation and evidence collection, blockchain-based evidence preservation and AI-powered originality detection technologies have been widely adopted. China is attempting to use AI tools to quickly compare the similarity of works, trace dissemination paths and preserve electronic evidence, effectively solving the key challenges of traditional rights protection – ie, difficulty in evidence collection, difficulty in determination and prolonged proceedings.

In terms of monitoring and law enforcement, mainstream digital platforms have generally deployed AI-powered copyright monitoring systems. Short video, live streaming, e-commerce and AI generation platforms have been subject to a higher duty of care. The traditional notice-and-takedown mechanism has been upgraded to a proactive prevention and control mechanism of prediction-filtering-action, greatly shortening the chain of dissemination of infringing content.

At the regional co-ordination level, copyright data interconnection, law enforcement assistance and mutual recognition of judgments under the RCEP framework are steadily advancing, effectively improving the efficiency of cross-border infringement governance.

In general, the Asia-Pacific copyright ecosystem in 2026 is characterised by technological intelligence, clear rules, proactive governance and co-ordinated protection. AI has not only reshaped content creation, but also reconstructed the copyright protection system, helping to achieve a dynamic balance between innovation incentives and rights protection. However, this change also brings new challenges to copyright protection, requiring lawyers to navigate multiple dimensions, including law versus technology, tradition versus innovation and rights protection versus industrial development to keep pace with the rapid evolution of the copyright industry in the digital age.

Trade Marks

Amendment and outlook for China’s Trademark Law

At the end of December 2025, the Standing Committee of China’s National People’s Congress deliberated on the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China (Revised Draft) and solicited public consultation. This marks the fifth amendment to China’s Trademark Law since its promulgation in 1982. Compared to previous amendments, this one introduces significant systematic changes. Beyond continuing to combat bad-faith trade mark squatting through a full-chain prevention approach and strengthening registrants’ obligations of use by shifting from a registration-oriented to a use-oriented basis, it also reflects contemporary characteristics such as focusing on digital economy governance and empowering the trade mark protection system through digitisation and intelligentisation.

AI deeply restructures the entire trade mark protection chain in the Asia-Pacific region

In 2026, AI has profoundly restructured the entire chain of trade mark protection in the Asia-Pacific region, forming a new ecosystem featuring intelligent examination, global real-time monitoring and regional co-ordination.

At the stage of registration and examination, AI has become a standard infrastructure. With the full implementation of the 13th Edition of the Nice Classification, China, Japan, South Korea and certain other major Southeast Asian countries have gradually promoted and applied AI-powered examination systems, realising the integration of automatic classification, similarity search, risk prediction and evidence verification. Among them, the trade mark examination cycle in a few countries, such as China, has been greatly shortened to three to six months, while the examination efficiency in most countries has also been significantly improved.

At the stage of use and supervision, AI tools are being used to achieve global real-time monitoring. To address issues such as hidden trade mark infringement through e-commerce keywords, trade mark dilution on social platforms, and the counterfeiting of packaging and decoration, AI can scan the entire network 24/7, conduct cross-border comparisons, trace the infringement chains and automatically preserve electronic evidence.

In terms of regional co-ordination, the interconnection of trade mark data and law enforcement assistance under the RCEP framework has become more seamless. AI facilitates the sharing of cross-border infringement information and reduces cross-border compliance costs for enterprises.

Overall, Asia-Pacific trade mark protection in 2026 is characterised by intelligent examination, global monitoring, proactive governance and regional integration. AI makes trade mark protection more accurate, efficient and fair, helping to upgrade brand innovation and market order simultaneously.