Economic coverage for the 21st century, journalist zhong yu xin, beijing
“rule-of-law compliance-building is a key foundation for ensuring high-quality innovation in business, sustainable development and increased resilience to risk, and, above all, a dynamic practice that will allow countries that are fully governed by the rule of law to engage in a full cycle of business innovation development.” professor chen jun, vice-president of the faculty of law of the university of nankai and director of the competition law research centre of the university of nankai, presented at the first business compliance rule of law forum of the university of nankai, “seminar on compliance guarantees for business innovations in development under a new development pattern”. A multidisciplinary seminar bringing together multidisciplinary experts from universities, the judiciary, law enforcement, business, etc., to speak out about the new development paradigm and the new path of business innovation in the development of compliance and rule of law guarantees in the context of a single national market。
On intellectual property compliance: contributing to enhancing core competitiveness of enterprises
At the meeting, prof. Yoon yi, faculty of law, university of tianjin, shared on the theme of “intellectual property compliance perspectives”, three aspects, namely, the revision of intellectual property law, judicial policy on intellectual property compliance, and intellectual property compliance review. In response to the revision of the law on intellectual property, ryu noted that the number of intellectual property cases in the country is currently on the increase, that specialized intellectual property courts and intellectual property courts have been set up successively, and that much of the content of the negotiations between china and the united states is related to intellectual property. The revision of the trademarks act, the anti-improper competition act, and the ongoing introduction of new policies on ipr compliance are of unique value in terms of ipr compliance, particularly by enterprises, not only to avoid adverse consequences at the international and national levels, but also to promote re-innovation of iprs and enhance the competitiveness of the core of enterprises。
In the context of the judicial policy of intellectual property compliance, ryo has proposed five important directions for intellectual property compliance review: first, the possibility of negative grievances arising from the complaints of prior rights holders; secondly, the counterfeiting of trademarks, patent cases and penalties for damage to the business environment of electrical platforms; thirdly, the impact of intellectual property disclosure on the process of listing niche new enterprises; fourthly, pre-suit injunctions in intellectual property disputes; and fifthly, cyber-security and business secrets in intellectual property。
He suggested that compliance by enterprises required attention to internal compliance management, such as patent tenure disputes, commercial secrecy issues, and adequate attention to foreign intellectual property disputes. “enterprise compliance with intellectual property rights is of unique value and, in addition to ensuring that the corporate entity of the enterprise is able to preserve its core assets without adverse consequences in uncertain circumstances, it can also promote the ability of the enterprise to innovate through the application of intellectual property rights.”
On the occasion of the talks, ryu hsio, deputy director and senior engineer of the tienjin intellectual property protection centre, described three functions of the tienjin intellectual property protection centre: first, rapid pre-trial, focusing on the long cycle of patent review, expediting patent authorization through the opening of green corridors; second, fast-track advocacy, focusing on assistance in administrative enforcement, patent infringement advice, intellectual property dispute mediation and enhanced collaboration in intellectual property protection; and third, integrated application, focusing on patent navigation and intellectual property operations。
Ryu hsu noted that the centre for intellectual property protection in tianjin city had found problems in the management of intellectual property rights, including compliance issues, in the course of its services. In this regard, it is recommended that enterprises implement the corporate intellectual property management code to control their intellectual property risks at the research and development, production, marketing, etc. In addition, the national intellectual property agency has drafted, inter alia, the code on the management of intellectual property in higher education, the code on the management of intellectual property in scientific research organizations, in order to promote the legal compliance of intellectual property management and improve its level of management. The issue of compliance with intellectual property management in the digital field, such as digital copyright, also deserves attention。
Talk about data compliance for the chatgpt type: breaking the algorithm black box and improving accountability mechanisms
Since last year, chatgpt-type applications have been rekindling social concerns. The aigc (manual intelligence generating content) brings about productivity change while also hiding risks. Professor lee il, vice-president, law school, liaoning university, explored the data compliance boundary of chatgpt-type applications in terms of data acquisition, data generation content, data disclosure and data management。
First, with regard to data acquisition, lijiang points out that the successful operation of chatgpt relies on the extraction of tens of thousands of levels of data to generate linguistic models and that the capture of data relates to copyright protection issues. Since chatgpt does not have an open source of language repository, there has been a continuing challenge to whether its database is authorized。
“for similar enterprises, illegal access to and storage of data may be involved.” he stated that, on the one hand, when applying, enterprises were not aware of the tenure status of the data seized, and the author himself was not even aware of the fact that copyright rights had been violated; on the other hand, data acquisition itself could create undue competition with other platforms, such as the better market resources for the quality of the content of some platforms, which, if left to other platforms, could well be considered an infringement of intellectual property rights。
Second, the chatgpt type application presents a compliance risk with respect to the content of the data generated. Lee rock analysis, while attempting to get chatgpt to reject the user's unreasonable generation requirements, openai would in fact inevitably generate bad information as a result of algorithm applications. First, chatgpt had difficulty in ensuring the authenticity of the text that it generated, which was often false and fictional. Second, if the output content of chatgpt is not identified and is misleading, it is likely to lead to the creation of responsibility for the violation. Thirdly, user behaviour also affects to a certain extent the content of the generation of chatgpt, such as chatgpt, which constantly adjusts content to the satisfaction of the user, which may reduce the authenticity of the resulting text. Fourth, the text produced by chatgpt may contain values that can easily lead to violations of the relevant provisions of the ecological governance of internet content and give rise to direct regulatory responsibility。
In addition, there is a risk of data leakage in operating chatgpt applications. Lee il believes that the risk of data disclosure may arise from the user's own behaviour, that chatgpt's use to users is not restricted, and that chatgpt's subsequent operation will be partially sensitive when entering personal information directly when it uses chatgpt without the relevant data protection awareness among the results of the output, information is even incorporated into the database for training in algorithms, thus creating a leak of information. Chatgpt, on the other hand, may also disclose information to third parties, either actively or passively。
Lee rock indicates that in response to the risk of leakage of relevant data, enterprises need to distinguish between different stages and adopt differentiated controls. “the correctness of controlling data sources should be avoided during the autonomous learning phase. When data are selected, they are carefully screened and, after entering the market, market protection can be carried out in a manner that indicates the status of the right of the object of the work by technology.”
In the context of compliance review, he further noted that, if the fear of society about the algorithm black box was to be broken, the enterprises concerned would need to make their data as public as possible and could consider a “machine + manual” audit model. At the same time, consideration needs to be given to the application of the safe harbour principle in data capture, data generation software. On the issue of accountability mechanisms for algorithms, responsibility should be embedded in all aspects of judicial assessment and fault-centred mechanisms for accountability for violations should be established. “if the platform provides false interpretations, it will have to bear adverse consequences.”
