54. The representative of Japan thanked the Chinese delegation for its comprehensive responses and said that he was encouraged by China's commitment to improve the protection of intellectual property rights as a national policy priority. During the transitional reviews from 2002 to 2004, Japan had raised questions regarding, among others, the improvement of enforcement in judicial procedures, the protection of well-known marks and the improvement of patent examination procedures. Regarding the improvement of enforcement procedures, his delegation appreciated China's considerable efforts to improve enforcement by issuing new judicial interpretations and conducting a nationwide campaign to strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights. In terms of the protection of well-known marks, Japan appreciated the implementation of the "Provisions on the Determination and Protection of Well-known Marks" in 2003, as well as the publication of lists of well-known marks and the recognition of some Japanese company names as well-known marks in China. With regard to patent examination procedures, it was appreciated that the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) had been making efforts to improve the procedures. However, despite these efforts by the Chinese authorities, the level of protection remained unsatisfactory.
55. A recent survey conducted by the Japanese Government had shown that significant problems continued to exist in intellectual property protection and enforcement in China. The survey, entitled "Field Survey for Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights in China", published on June 23 and available from the METI's website, www.meti.go.jp, indicated that Japanese industry regarded the application of administrative sanctions against IPR infringement and the way in which Chinese governmental authorities addressed the cases as insufficiently effective and that, as a result, repeated infringement was rampant. At least a half of the Japanese companies which had made use of remedial procedures in China had experienced repeated infringement. Therefore, IPR enforcement in China was insufficient to deter further infringements, and IPR infringement in China continually caused serious damage to the industry of Japan and that of other countries, including that of China itself.
56. He underlined the importance of enhancing the criminal prosecution of IPR infringements, especially of repeat offenders, as his delegation had emphasized in document IP/C/W/451, and said that his delegation was looking forward to a significant improvement of IPR enforcement by China, including effective additional measures to address any act of infringement.
