A New Judicial Framework for Plant Variety Protection: Landmark Phalaenopsis Cases in China

Recently, the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court of the Republic of China issued a special article on the Protection of Agricultural Innovation by law. It stated that a comprehensive assessment is used to determine the identity of varieties with the same core elements of the variety name and highly similar visual traits.

The following article introduces the new judicial approach to determining the identity of new plant varieties, using two infringement cases involving Phalaenopsis varieties, represented by Guangdong Knowpin Law Firm.

Background of the cases:

In the two infringement cases involving the Phalaenopsis varieties "Jubao Amethyst" and "Binfen Xueyu", the infringing parties employed highly specialized infringement methods, exhibiting characteristics of industrialization and concealment.

The infringing parties engaged in large-scale cloning and propagation of protected varieties without authorization through tissue culture laboratories, mastering the entire industrial chain from bottle seedling production to finished product sales.

The online promotion and sales on social media platforms such as WeChat, were conducted under simplified names such as "Xueyu" and "Amethyst", while offline, wholesale distribution was carried out through physical channels. Funds flowed through a combination of personal and corporate accounts, thereby evading monitoring and regulation.

Technical defense strategies:

The infringing parties raise three defenses: a) denying the identity of the variety, b) questioning the applicability of the DNA testing method, and c) claiming a legitimate source. These defenses exploit the technical difficulties in identifying new plant varieties and attempt to evade legal responsibility.

Legal breakthrough: Innovative recognition framework to solve difficulties

The Supreme People's Court, in the second instance judgment, established a comprehensive recognition framework of "identical core elements of the variety name, plus highly similar main traits, plus supporting DNA test reports, plus lack of rebuttal evidence," which breaks the excessive reliance on DNA test reports in traditional infringement cases of plant new varieties.

The court determined that the variety names of "Xueyu" and "Amethyst" are the core identification elements of "Binfen Xueyu" and "Jubao Amethyst", respectively. The infringing parties used the same core elements in naming the infringing product, which constitutes an important basis for the presumption of infringement.

A visual comparison between the DUS test report for the authorized variety and photos of the allegedly infringing plants shows a high level of consistency in key traits, including petal shape, lip structure, and color distribution. This straightforward comparison provides strong support for determining that both materials share the same identity.

Petal characteristics and overall plant traits of "Jubao Amethyst."

Petal characteristics and overall plant traits of the allegedly infringing variety

*Photo source: official account of Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court

To safeguard the rights of the affected parties, Knowpin Law Firm, built a complete chain from infringement discovery and evidence fixation to legal argumentation through systematic evidence organization, providing professional support for the court’s adoption of innovative identification methods.

Knowpin Value: Professional Ability and Social Responsibility

Based on long-term practical experience in PBR protection cases, Guangdong Knowpin Law Firm has independently developed a PBR traceability system, which has been put into practical application in the protection of new varieties of Phalaenopsis. This system provides a new and efficient way for rights holders to trace and combat infringement of new varieties.

The victories in these two cases help address the "difficulty in PBR protection cases," which has been an ongoing situation for plant breeding companies, and now offers strong guarantees for the development of their innovative work.

Industry impact: Injecting a stimulant into agricultural innovation

The sentence given by the Supreme People's Court of the Republic of China generates:

1.- Put more focus on the core concerns of breeding companies who are afraid to innovate and unwilling to protect their rights. In the past, due to the technical difficulty and high cost of protecting the rights of asexual reproduction crops, many breeders often chose to remain silent in the face of infringement. Nowadays, this judicial rule provides a clear path for safeguarding rights.

2.- Promote the tilt of resources towards "bottleneck" varieties. The verdict sends a strong signal that innovators are protected and infringers must be held accountable, which will encourage more companies to invest in the research and development of specialty varieties.

3.- Provide a reference way for similar cases. Especially suitable for ornamental flowers and other varieties with low retention of standard samples, incomplete adaptation of molecular detection methods, and strong visibility of plant characteristics