1. Supreme Court rules 'Sariwon' cannot be exclusively used as a firm name.

Supreme Court Section 3 (Chief judge: Justice Kim Jae-hyung) ruled that 'Sariwon' cannot be exclusively used as a firm name since it is a widely known name of a place, the seat of the provincial government of Hwanghaebuk-do, North Korea. At the appellate court trial of a firm name registration nullity suit filed by Mr. La so-and-so, who operates a restaurant called 'Sariwon,' against Mr. Kim so-and-so, who is the firm name right holder of 'Sariwon Myeonok', the court annulled the original decision against the plaintiff and remanded the case to    the patent court deciding in favor of the plaintiff, it was announced on the 20th.

The patent court had decided against the plaintiff, saying it is difficult to conclude that Sariwon is widely known to general consumers or traders as a geographical name. However, the Supreme Court has decided that the trial will be conducted again, saying Sariwon is a well-known city and a geographical name.

2. KIPO will raise a big fund in order to make a profit out of intellectual property.

The KIPO (Commissioner Sung, Yun-mo) will invest about 55 billion won in a fund of funds this year to create intellectual property (IP) investment fund on a scale of 100 billion won (governmental 55 billion won, and civilian 45 billion won). This is expected to be a big help for securing industrialization capital for small-and-medium businesses and venture businesses which have excellent patents.

This year, especially for universities and public research institutes which are having difficulties in securing foreign patents due to lack of funds, a fund for investing in making a profit out of foreign intellectual property will be created for the first time.

The KIPO has been investing in the fund of funds account since 2006 to make an investment of 877.4 billion won possible in 602 small-and-medium and venture enterprises by 2017.

This year, four intellectual property investment funds: new growth patent industrialization fund (17 billion won); public patent industrialization fund (20 billion won); foreign IP capitalization fund (30.5 billion won); and IP direct investment fund (32.5 billion won), will be created.

3. Trade surplus possible from Korean intellectual property rights.

Korean big business was able to achieve a trade surplus for the first time in the history of intellectual property rights last year due to reductions of patent royalties being paid to America, etc., by IT manufacturers, and increases in patent royalties received from foreign corporations of Korean enterprises which have relocated to Vietnam, etc. Ju, Won, head of the economy research office of the Hyundai Research Institute, said, It looks to be due to the effects of the relocation of automobile and smart phone factories to China, Vietnam, etc.

Actually, the intellectual property right trade deficits of big business have been decreasing steadily since 2014, the year when Samsung Electronics had its smart phone manufacturing plant moved to Vietnam. It seems that increases in smart phone production has increased the royalties coming into Korea.

The Bank of Korea said, It is encouraging that recently sizable intellectual property rights earnings are also being made from foreign enterprises, as in the past most intellectual property rights exports have originated from Korean corporations that have shifted abroad.

4. American pharmaceutical industry requests trade sanctions on Korea pursuant to the special provision of Article 301 'Intellectual Property Rights'

The association of the American pharmaceutical industry (PhRMA) submitted to the United States Trade Representative (USTR) an opinion for the highest level of trade sanctions 'requesting improvement including sanctions to be further increased, saying the intellectual property system of Korea is unreasonable'. This association has 38 members, comprising pharmaceutical companies including Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Pfizer and Bayer, and claims that the Korean drug system is excessively disadvantageous to drug price calculations or intellectual property protection. The means of sanctions is ‘Section 182 of Omnibus Trade and competitiveness Act’ that provides for strong retaliatory measures at the discretion of U.S. president. It is a so-called 'Special 301.' This provision has been rarely enforced since the launch of the WTO in 1988, but it appears that this provision is to be implemented in a similar manner to the 'Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act', which was recently used as a means of imposing regulations on imported steel.