China lawyers
Trading Babe Ruth was a big mistake. So what?
Donald Trump is that fantasy sports team owner who vetoed every trade involving Team China or Team Mexico (except his own, of course).  But now he’s become the league commissioner and he’s promised to fix or renegotiate all of those “bad” trade deals. Yikes.

Donald Trump and Peter Navarro, head of the newly formed White House National Trade Council, are always bitterly complaining about the huge trade deficit the United States has with China and other “bad” countries. But trade deficits should not be equated with unfair trade or with the alleged utter destruction of American manufacturing. This is like complaining that a baseball trade was so bad it caused the team not to win the World Series for, say, 86 years. Or, complaining that your team is suffering from a seven-to-one player trade deficit even though your team gave up seven players who were either nobodies, soon to be has beens, or never will bes, and your team gained a perennial All-Star or future Hall-of Famer in return.

The U.S. trade deficit with China does not mean the United States is losing to unfair trade. Trade of goods is just one part of what drives our economy. Though the United States may run a deficit in the trade of goods (both overall and with China), we run a surplus in the trade of services.  Also, China and Japan each own more than $1 trillion in U.S. Treasury bills, bonds, and other securities. Moreover, foreign companies are “insourcing” and purchasing U.S. assets, such as buying U.S. companies or investing in building new factories, shopping malls, hotels, etc. Harping on the United States’ trade deficit while completely ignoring other economic factors in which the United States has a surplus is an incomplete and misguided way to evaluate how the U.S. economy is performing. Full disclosure: my firm and especially our international trade and our China lawyers have a lot of skin in this game as we generate millions of dollars a year in services directly related to US-China trade.

Looking at trade balances between countries as if they were a zero-sum game to be “won” or “lost” does not make sense because countries don’t actually engage in trade with each other on a national level. Only companies and individuals in each country trade with one another. A trade (for fantasy league baseball players or for real life goods) happens only if both sides believe they are exchanging comparable value with each other. China exports boatloads of goods to the United States because U.S. companies and individuals see those imports as the best value for their specific needs. A good chunk of the imports contributing to the U.S. trade deficit are used to manufacture higher value-added products in the United States. The U.S. imports crude oil for U.S. refineries to produce gasoline and other higher-value petroleum products. Boeing airplanes include all sorts of parts imported from around the world. If Party A and Party B each a consensus that a trade is mutually acceptable, and there is no sign of fraud or collusion, why should the President/League Commissioner intervene and try to fix those so-called “terrible” trade deals?

Even those trades perceived to have been lopsided or unfair does not mean that the losing team on the deal needs rescuing or that the deal should be voided or undone. Teams make stupid deals all the time.

Every team hopes to avoid making bad trades, just as reducing the U.S. trade deficit is not wholly a bad idea. But reducing trade deficits by itself will not restore America’s manufacturing jobs any more than avoiding bad trade deals by itself will get teams a championship ring. The effects of a huge trade deficit or a bad trade deal, either in the market place or on the playing field, tend to work themselves out over time because there are so many other factors that go into the country’s economic performance or team’s performance. A good President/League Commissioner would know better than to try to fix every “bad” trade deal or trade deficit he doesn’t like.

Editor’s Note:  If you talk with people who regularly do business with China, especially people with companies that do business in China, they will mostly tell you that what they/we need is not so much higher duties on imports, but more pressure exerted on China to level the playing field for foreign companies doing business in China.

China counterfeit lawyersThe New York Times had a fascinating piece recently on the problems small business are having with knockoffs on Chinese e-commerce sites run by Alibaba. The story presented three case studies of companies making custom products: Vintage Industrial, a 25-person furniture maker based in Phoenix, All Earz Jewelry, a 1-person online jewelry shop based in Atlanta, and Reignland Concept, a 2-person online clothing store based in Los Angeles.

These companies all discovered multiple Alibaba listings for products that had been reverse engineered based on photographs on the companies’ own websites. Finding the counterfeit listings was the easy part, not least because the infringing listings use photos from the companies’ own websites. Removing those listings, and keeping new ones from cropping back up, has proven to be difficult and time-consuming, so much so that the small business owners are at their wits’ end.

I don’t blame them. Alibaba has a platform where IP owners can request removal of infringing listings, but it’s far from user-friendly. Our firm has never failed to remove an infringing listing, but we’ve been doing it for years and we have a team of Chinese-speaking lawyers and paralegals who understand China’s laws on intellectual property.

The best strategy, of course, would be to design a product that cannot be reverse engineered from a photo. But only a few products can be designed and marketed this way. For everyone else, protecting against infringement starts with registering your IP in China, and in particular any relevant trademarks, design patents, and copyrights. Without China registered IP, asking Alibaba to take down infringing listings will usually be an exercise in frustration.

Trademarks are the easiest to understand and the most important, because as we’ve discussed ad nauseam, China is a first to file country and once your brand gains notice in China, if you haven’t already filed for it someone else will. None of the products in the Times article were even remotely famous, which just goes to show how low the bar is in terms of gaining notice in China. A brand does not need to be famous to be profitable. And here’s the thing: a canny Alibaba seller will not only use the name of the brand but also register it himself, and thereby prevent not only the “true” brand owner but also other infringers from using that brand in China.

Are you listening, startups? I ask this because it is the smaller companies that so often have the problems described in the New York Times article, not because they are small, but because they did not do the registrations necessary to help prevent such problems or to be in a position to solve them if and when they occur. Our China IP team does a lot of work for big companies as well but much of that work is like shooting fish in a barrel. We send Alibaba the proof of our client having registered its trademark or its copyright in China and the offending product comes down.

Design patents protect product designs or aesthetic appearance. In the Times article, both the furniture and jewelry could maybe be protected by a design patent. But a design patent has an absolute novelty requirement: if a product isn’t new, it isn’t eligible for patent protection. And patent protection is country-by-country, so even if the products were protected by patents in the U.S. they wouldn’t be protected in China unless the owner had also filed in China. For companies that can easily tweak their product, this problem can be easily sidestepped; make a new version and it’s eligible for a design patent.

Copyrights protect original creative works in a fixed medium. In the Times piece, the furniture and jewelry could probably also be protected by copyright. China recognizes the validity of copyrights from any WTO signatory country, but if you are serious about taking down infringing listings on Alibaba, you’ll want to register your copyright in China. It just makes the process more smoothly and it increases your chances in making the process go at all.

Unfortunately for Reignland Concept, clothing designs can be difficult to protect under IP laws. Sometimes a clothing pattern can be protected by a copyright and/or trademark (e.g., the Burberry plaid) but that is more the exception than the rule. So although Reignland Concept may legitimately feel that its clothing is being knocked off by an Alibaba, that may just be the way fashion works.

However, Reignland could almost certainly use the protection of copyright infringement in one way: when the infringing listings use the exact photographs from Reignland’s website. The clothing may not be protected by copyright, but the photographs of the clothing are. This takedown approach works when Alibaba sellers are too lazy to take their own photographs, which is shockingly often.

Small business owners should take the Times article as a shot across the bow: no one is too small to need a China IP strategy.

China HR AuditIn part one of this series, I explained what has changed in China to make employer compliance — especially for foreign companies doing business in China — so important. In this part two, I explain what our China employment lawyers do in our HR audits to ensure that our clients are in compliance with China’s increasingly complicated, increasingly localized and increasingly important labor and employment laws.

An HR or employer audit will make sure you are complying with relevant employer laws (both national and local) and will reduce your regulatory, liability and lawsuit risks. Moreover, a comprehensive review and a full analysis can give you a clearer picture of what’s going on in your workforce and once you have the big picture, you can then determine (and we help our clients with this) the employer-employee problem(s) you need to remedy first.

We usually begin our HR audits by sending our clients a questionnaire to gain a basic understanding of their employer-employee situation in China.  We first ask our clients to provide the registered entity name and address (in both English and Chinese), as well as the official company registration document (usually: business license) for their China office(s). If you don’t have a China entity, there is no way your direct employment of a China employee is deemed legal under Chinese laws and your problems extend way beyond anything an HR audit can fix. See Doing Business in China with Deportation or Worse Hanging Over Your Head. We also ask our clients for an organizational chart of their China office(s), including the employee count for each location and a brief (1-2 paragraph) narrative describing how their China offices are organized and managed, including how HR matters are handled.

In order to complete a document review, we usually request all written employment documents used in their China office(s), specifically including any of the following:

  1. Documents containing job descriptions, including any postings on internal or external websites
  2. Offer letters
  3. Labor contracts (aka employment agreements)
  4. Rules and regulations (sometimes called an employee handbook or manual)
  5. Travel expense policies
  6. Non-compete agreements
  7. Intellectual property protection and/or confidentiality agreements
  8. Education reimbursement agreements
  9. Bonus agreements
  10. Settlement and/or severance agreements
  11. Other employment-related agreements (including company policies) presented or signed by any company representative, or signed by any employee
  12. Any documents filed with the local labor authorities

We want to review the executed copy of any and every document signed by an employee, including each individual employment agreement, along with any employment-related templates or forms used in their China offices. We ask our clients to advise if any of the above documents do not exist.

We also ask our clients to tell us of any any imminent employment related issues or questions they may have, such as imminent employment contract renewals, employment contract revisions in process, employee departures, and new hires. For example, if their China office is in the process of bringing in any new hires, we want to know about any potentially unresolved issues between the new hire and his/her previous employer. See Hiring Employees in China. Ideally, we would also review the employment documents executed by this person and his/her previous employer, but this is not always realistic.

If applicable, we also want to know how past terminations at the company were handled, and to that end we usually ask for a list of any former employees, including:

  1. their hire date
  2. their last date of employment
  3. whether the termination was voluntary or involuntary
  4. whether any severance payment was made
  5. any documents issued to the employee evidencing how the employment relationship was terminated
  6. a description of how the employer handled the transfer of social insurance and employee files.

Finally, we will want to know any particular HR problems the China office has experienced and any HR concerns they may have.

We then review the materials provided to us and we then prepare a written memorandum identifying any employment issues and providing recommendations and estimated costings for remedying the problems found. The time required to complete the audit depends on when the client responds to our questions and on what we find in the files. We then work with our clients to resolve issues that are raised by the audit.

The above may seem daunting at first, however your HR auditor would essentially handle most of the “dirty work” and it certainly beats being fined, named and shamed or criminally charged!

Negotiating with Chinese CompaniesJust read a post over at Andrew Hupert’s ChinaSolved Bog, entitled, 5 Negotiating Lessons from Sec. of State Tillerson’s Beijing Trip. Hupert, who I count among the foremost experts at negotiating with Chinese companies, uses Tillerson’s recent Beijing trip as the springboard for explaining five tips on how foreign companies should negotiate with Chinese companies.

Before I get to the five tips however, I want to highlight what I see as one of the best, one of the most realistic, and — most importantly — one of the most accurate descriptions on what it is like to negotiate with a Chinese company:

We’ve seen it before. The Chinese side raises their glasses of Mao-tai and proposes a long relationship of mutual understanding and joint cooperation. The western side “gambei’s” and then makes their own polite toast about “long term cooperation, success, and prosperity”.

Now, at this point the westerners feel they are done with the preliminary small talk, and are ready to begin the opening phase of the REAL negotiation.

The Chinese side feels they are running the new partnership, co-own the intellectual property, and will make all substantive decisions about operations, hiring, and distribution.

If you for any reason do not believe the above accurately reflects how the typical Chinese company views its dealings with foreign companies you should memorize the above and then in one year of dealing with China ask yourself again whether it is accurate or not, because it just is.

Now on to a some of the Hupert five.

That treacherous opening Chinese toast. Hupert notes how Tillerson, “like many western execs before him, . . . doesn’t seem to understand what the Chinese believe he’s agreed to. This is true. Our China lawyers almost never document a China deal without there being at least one issue on which our Western client believes the China side has agreed to something to which it has not. There are many explanations for why this always seems to be the case, ranging from cultural and language differences to the China-side penchant for agreeing to something to get something in return for that agreement and then retrenching from the previously agreed upon item after it has already succeeded in getting concessions from the Western side.

Manage the agenda, and then focus on individual deal points. Western negotiating protocol is to focus on the key negotiating goals, but Chinese negotiators “always” have a larger agenda. Or as Hupert puts it, “too many western executives fighting internal deadlines and hoping to satisfy their HQ sacrifice big-picture strategy for short-term deliverables.”

Watch the timing mismatch. “Don’t make real concessions now for longer-term promises.”  Western companies too often believe that if they make xyz concession to their Chinese counterparty now, their Chinese counterparty will make the next concession the next time around. Wrong. Where we see this a lot is with Western service companies cutting their rates to Chinese customers to “get into China now”  and “build loyalty, all with the plan to raise their prices later. Problem is that the Chinese company for whom you just cut your prices will view your loss leader pricing as their ceiling, not as a floor and it will move on to another naive Western company for its next contract. Or as Hupert puts it

You’re in the same boat – but who is the captain and who is the crew? Hupert concludes his post by highlighting how different perspectives so often can lead to problems down the road. Hupert uses the example of how it is “relatively easy to get a Chinese negotiator to agree in principle to a cooperative partnership,” but how that “cooperative partnership is viewed by the two sides will be very different. “Both sides tend to walk away thinking that they will have the power and authority to protect their interests and further their positions. In practice, however, Chinese tend to feel that they will call the shots on issues pertaining to China.”

For more on how to negotiate with Chinese companies, check out the following:

China Design PatentsLast year, in the midst of media hullabloo regarding Apple having lost a design patent lawsuit in China, we wrote China’s Design Patent Scourge Has Snared Apple: Nobody Panic, calling for everyone to calm down because Apple would likely prevail in the end. Well Apple just did. Prevail that is. First though a large dollop of background, taken straight from last year’s post.

Big media today has been covering Apple’s BREA design patent dispute with “a small Chinese competitor” and I woke up this morning with my inbox filled with emails from financial analysts and reporters clamoring to talk with me about this news. I assume the other China lawyers at my firm are being similarly inundated. This is obviously huge news and for more on this story, check out the following:

But first, everyone calm down and let me explain.

I went on to make clear that I did not know anything but Apple’s specific case, but felt like I did, because our own China lawyers we had seen so many facially similar design patent matters.

I do not know anything at all specific about Apple’s case. Not a thing. My law firm does not represent Apple on its IP matters, nor do we represent the Chinese company with this patent claim. Additionally, I have not looked at a single pleading in this case, nor have I discussed this case with any of the China IP attorneys in my firm who may (or probably not) know more about this case than I. This post is based on what we have seen (especially lately) happening with China design patents, which is a whole lot.

In the last six months or so, we have gone from dealing with maybe one China design patent matter a year to at least one a month. We cannot pin down this massive acceleration in design patent matters on any one thing and so we simply think that word has gotten out among Chinese companies regarding the effectiveness of engaging foreign companies in design patent disputes.

I then explained China’s design patent laws:

China law defines a design as a shape, pattern, or combination thereof or the combination of a color with a shape and pattern, with an aesthetic appeal and for industrial application. If you think this definition is incredibly vague and potentially broad enough to drive a truck through, you would be right. On top of this, China’s patent office does not “review” design patents before granting them. Or, as I love to tell our clients over the telephone, “I could probably secure a China design patent on the blue socks I am wearing right now.” When I say that, I am being intentionally dramatic, but I honestly believe my chances of securing such a design patent are not that bad.

The other things you should know about Chinese design patents are that the patent grants its holder exclusive use of the aesthetic features of a product not its functioning portion. In other words, the patent is on how the product looks; its external appearance. Not kidding, but it is quite possible that the small Chinese company with the mobile phone design patent could use its design patent against any cell phone company with a product that looks like an iPhone.

I then discussed the design patent cases our China attorneys were handling:

These cases typically start with a phone call from a Western company telling us that some company (usually a company it already knows and usually either its manufacturer or a competitor) just contacted the Western company (or the Chinese company that makes the Western company’s product) and said that the Western company’s product is violating the Chinese company’s China design patent. The Chinese company then threatens to sue the Western company for patent infringement damages and to block any of the Western company’s “infringing” product from leaving China. Needless to say, the companies that call us on these matters are more than a little bit concerned.

Though I am not going to claim that these are pleasant situations or inexpensive for our clients, but I will claim that they are not as bad as they initially appear. I have heard that China issues around ten times more design patents than the United States patent office, which reinforces my contention that I could get a China design patent for my blue socks. There is no substantive examination of a design patent application in China. Instead, all you really need to do to get a China design patent is to complete your design patent application properly. So if I complete the design patent application on my blue socks, and attach a proper and appropriate drawing of them, along with a proper power of attorney and I make the right claims regarding my having designed my blue socks and regarding their being of a new design, I almost certainly will get my design patent.

I then explained why design patents are so weak as are most design patent cases filed by Chinese company plaintiffs:

BUT, my blue sock design patent will be as weak as a kitten. And it is for this reason why China design patent actions are not as scary as they first appear and why I am calling for nobody to panic on Apple’s behalf either.

In the cases we handle nobody has yet actually had customs block their product from leaving China. The reason is because China customs generally requires a party seeking such a block to post a substantial bond. That substantial bond then becomes available to the party whose product has been blocked by customs. Again though, you want to avoid these cases if at all possible because even if you end up prevailing, you will need to incur considerable time, trouble and money to get there.

The difference between the cases we have handled and the Apple one, however, is that in our cases the Chinese companies threaten to get an order blocking our client from having its product made in China, but they never do. They never do because they know the cost of doing so is high and the likelihood of their getting such an order and having that order stick is very low. I read somewhere once that something like 70 to 90 percent of all Chinese design patents get invalidated when challenged. These Chinese companies know that if we were to challenge their design patents we would prevail, so why spend big money only to lose in the end. The Chinese company’s power comes from the design patent threat, not from reality.

In the Apple case, the Chinese company has brought a lawsuit and by doing so it has increased its threat value. Did the Chinese company do this because it has a valid patent? Or is it because it views Apple has having such deep pockets it has decided to go strong in the belief that doing so will get Apple to pay big money in settlement to end the issue? I don’t have the answers.

Most importantly, I predicted both in my blog posts (“Based … on our own history with China design patents, I am guessing Apple will prevail in the end”) and in a CNBC article in which I was interviewed, that Apple would eventually prevail.

Well guess what. Apple just did prevail before the Beijing Intellectual Property Court: “The court ruled that the regulator {that previously ruled against Apple] did not follow due procedures in ordering the ban while there was no sufficient proof to claim the designs constituted a violation of intellectual property rights.” China design patents: fear them just enough to get your own as an offensive weapon, but not too much.

China AttorneysBecause of this blog, our China lawyers get a fairly steady stream of China law questions from readers, mostly via emails but occasionally via blog comments as well. If we were to conduct research on all the questions we get asked and then comprehensively answer them, we would become overwhelmed. So what we usually do is provide a super fast general answer and, when it is easy to do so, a link or two to a blog post that may provide some additional guidance. We figure we might as well post some of these on here as well. On Fridays, like today.

Though it is getting more difficult and expensive for foreign companies to do business in China, China’s burgeoning wealth means the number of companies wanting to sell one shirt to 1 percent of China’s middle class just keeps increasing. Many of those companies are realizing that one of the easiest ways to accomplish that is via their own distributer in China. See That’s Hot: China Distribution Contracts. One of the most common questions posed to our China attorneys about distribution relationships in China is whether they need to be exclusive or not. Oftentimes, these are not even in the form of a question, but rather the potential client or client telling us that they will be giving their distributor an exclusive for all of China because they “understand” the Chinese government requires that.

As we wrote in China Distribution Agreements: Exclusivity Is NOT Required, this is simply not true. Unfortunately, Chinese companies frequently claim this and sometimes even get away with it, sometimes with disastrous results for the foreign company.

Let me explain.

There is no exclusivity requirement in China. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch. 没有.

This means you can have five distributors of your product or in just Shanghai if you want, and then add ten more later. This means you can have an exclusive distribution relationship with one distributor for all of Shandong Province and still have ten distributors for just Beijing. You are legally free to do what you want when it comes to exclusivity in your distributor relationship in China; you are constrained only by the deal you are able to make.

Oh, and one more thing, Chinese companies love to use the term Greater China in their distribution contracts with foreign companies as many foreign companies do not realize that includes Hong Kong and Taiwan and Macao. So be careful about that also.

China Foreign PolicyForeign Policy Magazine just came out with an exceptionally clear-headed, exceptionally valuable article on the derivations/influences of China’s foreign policy, entitled (in part and when you see the full title you will probably understand why I shortened it) How China’s History Shapes its Policies Today.

I posted it on our China Law Blog Facebook page with the following lead-in:

Great article by some truly great people. Read it. Study it. This is the sort of article that could become seminal for understanding China foreign policy. Then read it again.

Not much more to say about it other than that if you have any interest at all in China foreign policy, in China’s place in the world, or even in China at all you need (yes need, not should) go read it. Now. Oh, okay, I cannot resist: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Your thoughts?

China Trademarks
by Meaghan O’Malley. http://bit.ly/2nE4kcw

The Boston-based hamburger chain Wahlburgers, founded by Hollywood star Mark Wahlberg and his brothers, recently announced plans to open three restaurants in China, with an ambitious goal of opening up to 100 restaurants in China over the next ten years.

The project was announced as a joint venture between Wahlburgers and the Shanghai-based Cachet Hospitality Group. I have no opinion on the deal Wahlburgers struck (aside from a general lack of enthusiasm for joint ventures), but I do have an opinion about their trademark protection: they don’t have enough.

According to the Chinese Trademark Office website, the only trademark registration for “Wahlburgers” is in Class 43 for restaurants (餐馆). Yes, covering restaurant services is essential, but it’s really the bare minimum, and almost certainly won’t provide as much protection as Wahlburgers would want.

To understand why, it’s important to realize how the Chinese trademark system works. With few exceptions, a trademark registration for goods or services in a particular subclass only provides protection for that particular subclass. That’s a double-edged sword. It means that you don’t have to worry about your trademark being rejected because someone else has a confusingly similar trademark in another class (or even another subclass within the same class). But it also means that your trademark registration won’t prevent third parties from registering your exact trademark in other classes.

Here, Wahlburgers should have filed a trademark application to cover not only restaurants but also food. Their trademark registration prevents third parties from operating a restaurant called Wahlburgers, but has zero effect on anyone calling their hamburgers “Wahlburgers.” Moreover, anyone else could register the trademark “Wahlburgers” to cover hamburgers and other food, and then use the tagline “Home of the Wahlburgers®” on their menu and in their advertising. I’m sure that wouldn’t sit well with the Wahlbergs or with their Chinese partners.

It’s possible Wahlburgers was under an actual or imputed contractual constraint, as the US registration for “Wahlburgers” had already been licensed from Tom Wahl’s, a Rochester, NY-based hamburger chain whose website proudly proclaims it is “Home of the Wahlburger®.” But any dispute about who had the right to file trademark applications in China should have been sorted out quietly before holding a press conference to announce that Wahlburgers would be opening branches in Shanghai, Hangzhou, and Wuhan. If Chinese trademark squatters haven’t already filed applications for Wahlburgers to cover hamburgers and other food, they will soon.

It’s 2017. American companies going to China need to get their trademark act together. When you’re filing for trademarks in China, don’t think that the same rules apply as in the United States. Operate within the system as it actually is, not as you think it ought to be.

China contract lawyersIn my first post in this series (here), I described the five basic attitudes Chinese companies have regarding advanced equipment being sold into China.  In part 2 (here), I set out two of five tactics high value equipment sellers should follow when selling advanced (and therefore expensive) equipment into China: One, do not discount, and two, get paid before you deliver your equipment to your China buyer.

In this, part 3, I wrap up this series by setting forth the remaining three tactics equipment sellers should employ when selling their equipment to Chinese companies.

3. Do not deliver the equipment until first verifying that the conditions for its installation have been met. Remember that the Chinese side believes your equipment works based on an almost “magic” formula and your rules on how to set up for its installation and the specifications for its use are just a subterfuge you use to “hide the magic.” The detailed set up work is therefore unnecessary. Meeting the specifications is not necessary. So the Chinese side will not do the proper set up and they will ignore the specifications. But then when your equipment does not work as it was supposed to, the Chinese side will blame you for its failures.

The following are two (of many) true stories that illustrate how this typically goes down:

  • A heavy equipment manufacturing company delivers iron pipe casting equipment. The conditions of sale provide that the floor of the casting room must be perfectly level. When the equipment is delivered, the casting room has an uneven dirt floor. The casting machine does not work and the Chinese side does not pay a single penny on the contract. The Chinese bank that guaranteed the payment sides with the Chinese buyer. Why create a level, clean concrete floor for a dirty machine used for metal castings, one of the China company’s engineers asked at one point.
  • A water power equipment manufacturing company delivers a new hydropower generation set of equipment. The specifications provide that the current flow can never exceed 6 knots. When the equipment is delivered, the Chinese side installs it in an unapproved location where it is well known the current exceeds 8.5 knots. Within one year, the entire facility is destroyed. The Chinese side defaults on the last payment and the reputation of the foreign company is destroyed. The foreign company lost money on the project and never did another sale in China.

Foreign equipment sellers cannot rely just on clear contractual specifications and then relying on the specifications when there is a problem. The foreign seller should itself ensure the conditions are met before it delivers the equipment. And if the conditions are not met, the foreign seller should not deliver. If there is a cost in confirming your Chinese buyer has met the specifications (and there usually will be), you should build that cost into the cost for your product. Remember: the failure of the installation is always your fault and the Chinese side will always find a way to make you pay for that failure. We have said this before and it made people mad, but some of our most experienced and sophisticated and successful China essentially charge a premium to Chinese buyers simply to cover themselves in advance against these sorts of problems.

4. Build required training and after sales maintenance and support into the price of the equipment. No matter how much your potential Chinese buyer tries to get you to decouple the pricing for maintenance and support (and then eliminate it entirely) do not make these optional add-ons that are billed for an additional fee. If you make these optional and charge extra for them, the Chinese side will almost always choose not to pay. So you have to force them to accept training and support as part of your sales price.

Why do the Chinese refuse to pay? Your trying to require them to pay for after sales maintenance is just you admitting that your product is somehow defective and why should they buy a defective product. If properly manufactured your equipment should work forever, with no service or maintenance required and your trying to make the Chinese side pay for training and service as an add-on is you unfairly seeking to increase the price of a product that is already unfairly expensive.

There is one exception related to training. If the Chinese side is planning to clone your equipment, they will seek extensive training in how the equipment operates. Their goal though is not training; their goal is to somehow obtain the formula that will allow them to clone your machine. For this reason, you should carefully control your training with Chinese companies.

During training, the Chinese side will ask for more information and more training time than is necessary. They will also insist on visiting the U.S. manufacturing facility and they will expect to spend substantial time in that facility. For this reason, all training obligations must be carefully defined to prevent your costs from skyrocketing out of control. You should carefully limit time, location and access to information. One good way to control this is to require the Chinese pay by the hour for all training provided in excess of the basic training included in the purchase price.

Many foreign equipment suppliers say they will provide whatever training proves “reasonably” necessary. This sort of an approach is nearly always a mistake because neither Chinese companies nor Chinese courts truly understand or employ the concept of reasonable. You therefore should state state with precision the training you will be providing, where you be providing it, who will be providing it, and for how many hours you will be providing it. The same rules apply to provision for after sales support. Chinese companies tend to abuse after sales support obligations. So those obligations should also be spelled out clearly in your contracts as well. Again, I base this not on any “feelings” I have about China, but based on my having represented countless foreign equipment sellers on countless China equipment transactions and on what I have heard from other equipment companies and from other China lawyers who represent them.

5. Protect your IP through with a China-centric contract. Protecting the intellectual property you have in the advanced equipment you sell into China should be a core goal in all of your sales. Understand the basic approach from the Chinese side: your product is too expensive and b) any form of IP protection is just a unfair device you are using to force them to pay the unfair price of the machine. So the goal of the typical Chinese company is to purchase one or two items at a bargain price and then clone them in China at a “fair” price.

The obvious way to protect the intellectual property in your advanced equipment is to register your patents in China. But for various reasons (including time bars) this is often not possible. Where there is no patent registration (and oftentimes even when there is), your best solution is to incorporate basic IP protections into your sales agreement. This is essential for China.

To accomplish this, either your sales contract or a collateral agreement must provide for the buyer agreeing to the following:

  • Buyer will not reverse engineer or manufacture a copy/clone of the product or engage any affiliate or third party to do the same. A complex legal definition is not required. A blunt, simple statement (in Chinese) is what is required.
  • Define confidential information information (such as the information you provide in training and support) and require no confidential information can be used by your buyer or by any affiliate or by any third party to infringe on your product.
  • Provide for monetary damages if these restrictions are violated. Injunctions rarely work in China, so contract damages are required.
  • Impose these restrictions with a written agreement enforceable by litigation in China. This is a key requirement. Your English language sales agreement that is enforceable in the New York or in London or in Geneva is not going to be helpful in protecting your IP and if it makes sense for you to use that sort of agreement on the sell side (and sometimes it does), you should have a separate IP protection agreement in Chinese, subject to Chinese law and enforceable by litigation in China.

China employment lawyerThis is the first of a two part series on why it has become so important to comply with China’s labor and employment laws and how best to make sure your company is in compliance. In this first part, I briefly explain what has changed in China to make employer compliance — especially for foreign companies doing business in China so important. And in part 2, I explain what our China employment lawyers do by way of Human Relations audits to ensure our clients are in compliance.

Over the last few years China and Chinese employees have become serious about enforcing China’s labor and employment laws. I defy you to find any foreign employer in China that has not had their employer decisions legally tested in the last few years. And thanks to a new law called Measures of Public Disclosure of Significant Violations of Labor Protection Laws that took effect on January 1, 2017, China employers that violate China’s labor protection laws face the additional threat of being “named and shamed.” The following violations of China’s labor laws may be made public by the relevant labor authorities:

  • Failing to pay “substantial” employee remuneration
  • Violating the laws on working time or rest or vacation and the circumstances are “serious”
  • Violating any child labor laws
  • Failing to pay employee social insurance and the circumstances are “serious”
  • Violating the special rules on protecting female workers and underage workers and the circumstances are “serious”
  • Causing significantly bad social consequences due to violations of labor laws
  • Other serious illegal conduct

Like pretty much everything related to China’s employment laws, enforcement of these naming and shaming measures is going to depend on the locale. Guangdong Province, for example, has been disclosing labor authorities’ rulings on employer violations even before the new law was implemented. According to Guangdong published rulings for the first three quarters in 2016, the first three violations mentioned above: (1) failure to pay employee remuneration, (2) overtime law violations and (3) using child labor have been the most common illegal practices. Labor authorities are cracking down particularly hard on employer failure to pay employee remuneration.

What is considered a “substantial” failure to pay? If you owe 10 employees wages, you will no doubt be penalized and your violation will be made public. If you owe one employee a substantial amount (could be as low as 20,000 RMB), you may be listed as well. In other words, the threshold is not terribly high, especially for foreign companies whose employee wages tend to be higher. And since the labor authorities have gobs of discretion in deciding whom to name and shame, we are expecting foreign companies to get less slack. Egregious violations subject employer companies and the person-in-charge to criminal liabilities. Failing to pay substantial employee remuneration is a crime and will be prosecuted. This is not something you want to get wrong.

So if you employ anyone in China, now is the time for you to get compliant. In tomorrow’s post, I will set out our method for accomplishing that.

Editor’s Note: Whenever we write something related to ensuring compliance with China’s employment laws, companies with no legal entity in China contact us “to get into compliance.” If you have “employees” in China but no company in China, your problems go way beyond what is written above. For how to handle that sort of situation, you should check out Doing Business in China with Deportation or Worse Hanging Over Your Head and follow and read the links in that post. Now!