I have a new rule. When I get three or more emails on a topic, and at least one of them says something like the following:
“Dan, I am sure you are familiar with the recent Microsoft case and already planning to blog on it, but….”
I am going to blog on it even though I don’t want to and even though I have nothing to say on it — none of you better be thinking, yeah, what else is new?
Yes, I have read about the China Microsoft decision. Yes, Microsoft is in my backyard. Well not literally, but even though I live in the city of Seattle and Microsoft is in the far away ex-burb of Redmond, my house is surrounded on all four sides by Microsofties, as we call ’em. And yes, I have read a bit on the decision, but almost all of what I have read has been pretty much nonsensical in its legal analysis.
But, having said all that, I really do not know what to say about it. I have seen articles assuming the ruling favoring a Chinese company over Microsoft is proof positive of how a foreign company cannot get a fair trial in China. And I have seen articles assuming the ruling favoring a party suing for IP infringement means China is advancing to Western standards of IP protection. The reality is that this is just one case and from what I can tell about it (which is, quite honestly very little because I have not read the decision itself) is that it seems like just your normal decision based on the facts and the law. My tentative opinion is that this decision will have no lasting meaning beyond the parties to the case. Everyone just move along.

Print:
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn
Photo of Dan Harris Dan Harris

Dan is a founder of Harris Bricken, an international law firm with lawyers in Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, China and Spain.

He primarily represents companies doing business in emerging market countries, having spent years building and maintaining a global, professional network. 

Dan is a founder of Harris Bricken, an international law firm with lawyers in Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, China and Spain.

He primarily represents companies doing business in emerging market countries, having spent years building and maintaining a global, professional network.  His work has been as varied as securing the release of two improperly held helicopters in Papua New Guinea, setting up a legal framework to move slag from Canada to Poland’s interior, overseeing hundreds of litigation and arbitration matters in Korea, helping someone avoid terrorism charges in Japan, and seizing fish product in China to collect on a debt.

He was named as one of only three Washington State Amazing Lawyers in International Law, is AV rated by Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory (its highest rating), is rated 10.0 by AVVO.com (also its highest rating), and is a recognized SuperLawyer.

Dan is a frequent writer and public speaker on doing business in Asia and constantly travels between the United States and Asia. He most commonly speaks on China law issues and is the lead writer of the award winning China Law Blog. Forbes Magazine, Fortune Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, Investors Business Daily, Business Week, The National Law Journal, The Washington Post, The ABA Journal, The Economist, Newsweek, NPR, The New York Times and Inside Counsel have all interviewed Dan regarding various aspects of his international law practice.

Dan is licensed in Washington, Illinois, and Alaska.

In tandem with the international law team at his firm, Dan focuses on setting up/registering companies overseas (via WFOEs, Rep Offices or Joint Ventures), drafting international contracts (NDAs, OEM Agreements, licensing, distribution, etc.), protecting IP (trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights and patents), and overseeing M&A transactions.