Haiyan Ren

As co-founder of Wanhuida Intellectual Property, what steps is your firm taking to increase DEI in the workplace, and what could the industry be doing to improve hiring processes?

Although the majority of IP practitioners are women, they remain a distinct minority among partners and managers. As the only woman among the firm’s co-founders, I have made an effort to create a women-friendly environment in our firm, ensuring that their voices are heard and that they have equal opportunities. I am pleased to report that our firm has done a good job in this regard. Half of our partners are women, and two of them are on our eight-member management committee.

Over the years, Wanhuida has taken various steps to increase DEI. We have sponsored a programme to send younger attorneys with potential to study abroad since 2018. We particularly encouraged our female colleagues to take advantage of this programme. We also have a mentor system, which pays special attention to women attorneys. It offers guidance on career development and achieving a good work-life balance.

In China, DEI is still in its early stages. More training and education are necessary to enhance awareness at the HR and management levels.

You are hailed as the firm’s most experienced trademark attorney. What has been the key to your success, and what advice would you give to others considering a career in trademark law?

I was fortunate to work with several well-known international brands early on in my career, which gave me valuable insight when it comes to supporting in-house lawyers in meeting their needs. The key is being a client’s partner rather than mere external counsel. No one can guarantee a win in every case. It is crucial to effectively communicate potential risks to clients while zealously advocating for their interests. Always be ready to raise tough questions, but never fail to suggest solutions.

Trademark matters often involve considerations beyond legal issues because they intersect with various aspects of daily life. A deep understanding of the law and its practical implications is vital. Trademark decisions can significantly affect commercial success and could mean life or death for a business. As a trademark practitioner, it is essential to look beyond issues of fact and law and understand the broader business and social concerns involved. Practitioners must be prepared for meticulous and sometimes tedious work, but they could find immense satisfaction in solving critical problems.

How have client demands evolved over the course of your career – and how has your practice evolved to keep pace with these?

The essence of client demands has remained relatively consistent throughout my career, which can be condensed into three essential words: proactive, responsive and reliable. Fortunately, we’ve been able to establish true partnerships with our clients.

However, the content of client demands has evolved over time, which has required a significantly more sophisticated approach to legal skills. When I began practising three decades ago, intellectual property was in its early stages of development in China. IP laws and rules were not as complex and issues were more straightforward, with many cases related to anti-counterfeiting.

Over the past few decades, globalisation and technological innovations have made IP protection crucial in supporting China’s rapid economic growth. The IP landscape has dramatically changed, encompassing new types of intellectual property, novel infringement and intricate laws and regulations. As IP practitioners, we must continuously update our knowledge and experience to meet clients’ needs.

As a trademark attorney, I have expanded my practice to include design, copyright, domain name and other related matters. I also make sure that my team covers all frontiers of legal developments. With years of experience and a broadened perspective, I focus my efforts on creating strategic plans that are tailored to our clients’ unique needs.

There has been a renewed focus on GIs in China, with new foreign regulations having taken effect in February. What are your top tips for rights holders looking to protect their brands using this right?

Historically, recording GIs with the Administration of Quality Supervision Bureau and registration before the trademark office as collective or certification trademarks were parallel options for acquiring GI protection. Now, new regulations have clarified that only the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) is responsible for approving or cancelling GI registrations and that local IP offices have jurisdiction to take action against GI infringement. In other words, while trademark or GI registration is still optional, the administrative channel has been unified, which will mitigate confusion when it comes to GI protection.

These new regulations aim to contribute significantly to GI protection by enhancing the examination process, strengthening management and clarifying the obligations of local IP authorities. They provide clearer definitions of infringement, including cases where GI names are misused outside their location of origin.

A unified administrative system for GI protection benefits right holders. For comprehensive and robust protection, GI owners are advised to pursue both GI and trademark registration. To enforce GI rights, stakeholders should explore all available remedies, including administrative, judicial and even criminal actions. The more layers of protection obtained, the stronger the rights become.

In your view, what more could the industry be doing to raise awareness among consumers about the dangers of counterfeits and infringement?

The impact of counterfeits and infringement varies across industries.

For critical industries – drugs, food, cosmetics and alcohol – consumers generally recognise the dangers associated with counterfeit products and thus would not knowingly purchase fake products. In these sectors, robust consumer education is essential. Providing clear information on how to distinguish genuine products from fake ones can empower consumers to make informed decisions.

For fast-moving consumer goods – clothing, shoes and bags – it depends on the location of the consumer. In big cities and developed regions, intentional purchases of counterfeit goods are more common. Consumers in more urban areas are generally aware of the trade-offs but may still choose fakes for various reasons. However, in smaller cities and economically underdeveloped areas, lack of knowledge on how to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit might be an issue.

Therefore, tailored education and persistent vigilance are crucial. Education campaigns are necessary and targeted efforts should address specific contexts and consumer demographics. Protecting consumers and maintaining trust in product authenticity requires ongoing vigilance and collaboration across industries.

As joint head of the firm’s trademark practice group, how do you ensure that clients receive the highest standard of service while all staff fulfil their potential?

As a practice head, part of my job is unlocking employee potential. Providing ample room for career growth and sharing opportunities and profit with the younger generations is essential. As the firm grows from a boutique firm to an IP powerhouse of 500 professionals, it remains our top priority to ensure consistent service quality.

As a key client contact, my role is evolving too. I now delegate more responsibility to our younger practitioners, letting them take initiative and fostering a sense of ownership in them. While I continue to lead the team in critical client matters, clients are placing more confidence in our young partners.

We also invest significant effort in selecting, training and guiding our young partners, who play a pivotal role in servicing our clients. Meanwhile, we actively seek out new talent to ensure a fresh infusion of ideas and skills.

Further, we have established a client-oriented system. Each client team is overseen by a senior-level contact who thoroughly understands the client’s needs, our relationship history, the merits of important cases and the team’s strengths across various areas. This process ensures efficient and timely utilisation of our best resources to benefit our clients.

ICANN is pledging to make progress on providing increased visibility when it comes to domain name registrants, particularly with its WHOIS database. Do you feel optimistic about this promise, and what changes are you hoping to see?

While it is encouraging that ICANN is taking steps to enhance visibility, I believe that they must strike a balance between these efforts and the overall efficiency of their system for users. The effectiveness of this visibility hinges on two critical factors: disclosure levels and data accuracy. Information transparency is essential for meaningful insight.

Therefore, it would be good if ICANN could take a more proactive approach. If it could establish a mechanism akin to other e-commerce platforms’ notice and take-down/disconnect processes, this would encourage right holders to report potentially infringing websites. Such a mechanism could help to reveal the true operators behind illicit activities. I sincerely hope that increased visibility will assist rights holders in tracing the origins of associated websites involved in counterfeiting or infringement, which is an ongoing challenge.

You have authored several articles on combatting bad-faith filing in China. What are the key issues that rights holders should be aware of, and how can they avoid these?

Since the revision of Trademark Law in 2019, China has been waging a war against bad-faith filings, which has yielded successful results. The trademark office proactively rejects tens of thousands of bad-faith applications annually and maintains a blacklist of offenders. Consequently, the number of oppositions and invalidations has decreased in recent years. The high success rates of true brand owners in opposition and invalidation proceedings underscores the CNIPA’s commitment to combatting bad-faith filings.

It is also essential to address other pressing issues that are giving stakeholders headaches. One challenge is the high rate of rejections for new trademark filings based on absolute grounds, specifically those deemed to be deceptive or as having an adverse social influence. If a trademark is erroneously found to be either of these, it will be banned outright from registration and use.

We are vigorously fighting for a client’s registered trademarks of strategic importance against a wrongful invalidation decision based on the deceptive clause before the Supreme People’s Court. I would encourage brand owners in similar quandary to fight the battle, because once a trademark right is relinquished, it is impossible to retrieve.

The Supreme People’s Court and CNIPA zeroed in on infringement with new guidelines last year. Twelve months on, how have these affected your practice?

The guidelines emphasise stronger collaborative measures between administrative and judicial bodies in IP protection. This has led to more synchronisation between the Supreme People’s Court and CNIPA, ultimately enhancing protection mechanisms.

This change somewhat affects law firms’ strategies with regard to navigating IP-related litigation and administrative actions. Overall, these guidelines and changes have led law firms to adjust their practices, focusing more on compliance, preventative measures and strategic litigation to effectively traverse the evolving legal landscape.

What aspects of your work do you enjoy most, and why?

Guiding young partners and associates in creating strategic plans and resolving complex cases – particularly those that necessitate cross-team collaboration – requires more than just legal expertise. It demands soft skills for effective communication both internally and externally. Witnessing the growth of our team members as they develop these skills is truly rewarding. And, of course, nothing brings greater satisfaction than client approval and recognition of our team efforts.