A court case involving counterfeits and China is nothing new except this time，it is the Chinese company that is doing the suing．In February Netac，a company based in Shenzhen，took PNY Technologies of New Jersey to court in Texas and so became，it is thought，the first mainland firm to sue an American one for patent infringement．
Netac claims that PNY has infringed its patent for external flash-memory storage devices，also known as“flash drives”or“key drives”．which have replaced floppy disks as the easiest way to carry data around．It is seeking“significant”(though unspecified)financial damages．The Chinese company obtained a Chinese patent for its technology in 2002 and an American one in 2004．PNY，it says， infringed the later patent，stunting Netac’s growth in the American market for flash drives，which is worth more than$2 billion a year and growing fast．
Litigation，alongside memory chips，appears to be turning into a bit of a speciality for Netac．Over the past three years，the firm has brought patent suits against Hua Qi，a Beijing-based local competitor； Acer of Taiwan；and Sony of Japan．Hua Qi lost，but is appealing Acer has settled；and the Sony suit is ongoing．On the other hand，19 international manufacturers have protested that Netac’s patents are too broad，though around ten others，including Samsung Electronics of South Korea，have been happy to license its technology．
Netac is likely to prove a harbinger．As Chinese companies develop their own patents,copyrights and trademarks and seek to protect them，China as a whole will become more sensitive to the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights(IPR)．“It is an encouraging sign that Chinese companies have become mature in using IPR to protect their interests，”Hu Zuochao，vice-president of the Patent Protection Association of China，told the Chinese media．
If China is indeed taking intellectual property more seriously，that could also be good for foreign investors．The American government estimates that Chinese violations of foreigners’IPR cost international firms at least$60 billion a year as much as the entire annual foreign direct investment into China．But comments such as Mr．Hu’s may also be a signal of what Lester Ross，a lawyer in Beijin9， calls a rising tide of“techno-nationalism”．He predicts growing security fears and resentment over foreigners earning royalties from technology that China could produce itself．This will drive many more Chinese firms to sue foreign ones over patent rights，thinks Mr．Ross who points out that Chinese firms are increasingly confident about using the American courts to fight contract and payment disputes． New Chinese interest in the protection of intellectual property might help foreigners。Then again,it could just mean higher legal bills．[456 words]
1．It is implied in the text that______．
A．China’s IPR has been seriously infringed by foreigners
B．Netac is the only Chinese company to sue an American company
C．the odds are against Netac，which is suing PNY for its infringement
D．few Chinese companies attempted to legally protect its IPR in the past
2．According to the text，Netac______．
A．has won the distinction of speciality for litigation
B．has lost$2 billion because of its patent being infringed
C．has produced the most advanced flash drives in the world
D．has more competitors in IT industry than any other company in China
3．It is predicted that______for patent infringement．
A．Netac is to sue more foreign companies
B．more Chinese companies will sue foreign companies
C．American government will support Netac to sue PNY
D．China has become more sensitive to foreign investors
4．It seems that foreign investors might take a attitude towards China’s protection of its IPR．
A．critical
B．doubtful
C．positive
D．negative
5．It can be inferred from the text that China______．
A．discovers the virtues of intellectual property
B．scarcely violates foreigners’intellectual property rights
C．strictly protects the IPR of the technology it produces
D．strictly protects the IPR of foreign investors in China
難句透析
①A court case[involving counterfeits and China]is nothing new except this time，it is the Chinese company that is doing the suing．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的現(xiàn)在分詞短語“involving counterfeits and China”是“case”的后置定語。下劃線所標(biāo)示的“it is…that…”是強(qiáng)調(diào)句型。
【釋義】一場涉及假冒產(chǎn)品以及中國在內(nèi)的訴訟案并不是什么稀奇的事，但是這次提出訴訟的是中國公司。
②Netac claims[that PNY has infringed its patent for external flash memory storage devices，also known as“flash drives”or“key drives”，(which have replaced floppy disks as the easiest way to carry data around)]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that PNY…around”是“claims”的賓語從句。圓括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“which…around”是“storage devices”的后置定語從句。斜體字所標(biāo)示的過去分詞短語“also known as‘flash drives’or key drives”是“storage devices”的后置定語。
【釋義】朗科科技公司說，美國PNY公司的機(jī)外閃存裝置，也稱之為“閃驅(qū)”或“鑰匙式磁碟”，侵犯了其專利。這種閃存已取代軟盤，成了攜帶資料的最便利方式。
③On the other hand，19 international manufacturers have protested[that Netac’S patents are too broad]，[though around ten others，including Samsung Electronics of South Korea，have been happy to license its technology]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that Netac’s…broad”是“have protested”的賓語從句。方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“though… technology”是整句的讓步狀語從句。這個(gè)讓步狀語從句中的主語是“around ten others”，謂語動(dòng)詞是“have been”。
【釋義】另一方面，19家外國公司提出了*，認(rèn)為朗科的專利適用面過寬。不過，包括韓國三星電子在內(nèi)的大約10家公司樂于承認(rèn)其技術(shù)專利。
④The American government estimates[that Chinese violations of foreigners’IPR cost international firms at least$60 billion a year as much as the entire annual foreign direct investment into China]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that Chinese…into China”是“estimates”的賓語從句。
【釋義】美國政府估計(jì)，中國每年侵犯外國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的行為給跨國公司造成的損失達(dá)600億美元，相當(dāng)于外商對華一年的直接投資額。
⑤He predicts growing security fears and resentment over foreigners earning royalties from technology[that China could produce itself]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】謂語動(dòng)詞“predicts”后面跟有兩個(gè)用“and”連接的并列的賓語“9rowing security fears”和“resentment…produce itself”。現(xiàn)在分詞“growin9”用做定語，修飾“security fears”和“resentment”。方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that China could produce itself”是“technology”的后置定語從句。
【釋義】他預(yù)言中國公司對安全的擔(dān)心會(huì)日益增長，對外國人靠中國人本可以自己開發(fā)的技術(shù)而賺取技術(shù)版稅的不滿將日益高漲。 全文翻譯
一場涉及假冒產(chǎn)品以及中國在內(nèi)的訴訟案并不是什么稀奇的事，但是這次提出訴訟的是中國公司。今年二月，位于深圳的朗科公司將新澤西州PNY科技公司告到了田納西州法庭，據(jù)了解，該公司成為了中國大陸首家起訴美國公司侵犯專利的公司。
朗科科技公司說，美國PNY公司的機(jī)外閃存裝置，也稱之為“閃驅(qū)”或“鑰匙式磁碟”，侵犯了其專利。這種閃存已取代軟盤，成了攜帶資料的最便利方式。該公司正在計(jì)算“重大的”經(jīng)濟(jì)損失，盡管目前還沒有詳細(xì)列出確切的數(shù)目表。這家中國公司在2002年的時(shí)候取得了本國的技術(shù)專利，2004年取得了美國的技術(shù)專利。該公司表示， PNY侵犯了它在美國取得的專利，阻礙了該公司閃驅(qū)在美國市場的增長，損失價(jià)值達(dá)每年20億美元，而該公司閃驅(qū)的發(fā)展速度非?？?。
起訴，如同存儲(chǔ)芯片一樣似乎逐漸成為朗科公司特有的特點(diǎn)。過去3年里，該公司已經(jīng)起訴過國內(nèi)的競爭對手花旗公司(位于北京)，臺(tái)灣的宏基公司以及日本的索尼公司。而在這幾場訴訟戰(zhàn)中，敗訴的花旗仍然在上訴，宏基已經(jīng)調(diào)停，而跟索尼的訴訟仍在進(jìn)行。另一方面，19家外國公司提出了*，認(rèn)為朗科的專利適用面過寬。不過，包括韓國三星電子在內(nèi)的大約10家公司樂于承認(rèn)其技術(shù)專利。
朗科似乎要扮演先驅(qū)者的角色。隨著中國公司發(fā)明了自己的專利、版權(quán)以及商標(biāo)并且積極尋求保護(hù)，整個(gè)中國都會(huì)對知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的保護(hù)以及執(zhí)行保持越來越高的敏感度。中國專利保護(hù)協(xié)會(huì)的副主席Hu Zuochao對中國的媒體表示，中國公司在利用知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)來保護(hù)自己的利益方面已經(jīng)成熟，這是一個(gè)令人鼓舞的跡象。
如果中國真的嚴(yán)肅對待知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)，那么這對于外國投資者來說也是個(gè)好消息。美國政府估計(jì)，中國每年侵犯外國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的行為給跨國公司造成的損失達(dá)600億美元，相當(dāng)于外商對華一年的直接投資額。但是，像Hu先生這樣的評(píng)價(jià)有可能是目前身居北京的Lester Ross律師所說的“本國技術(shù)保護(hù)主義”浪潮來臨的跡象。他預(yù)言中國公司對安全的擔(dān)心會(huì)日益增長，對外國人靠中國人本可以自己開發(fā)的技術(shù)而賺取技術(shù)版稅的不滿將日益高漲。 Ross律師認(rèn)為，此舉就會(huì)讓越來越多的中國公司對外資企業(yè)侵犯專利權(quán)進(jìn)行起訴，而中國公司對利用美國法庭解決合同及支付糾紛日益自信。中國人對知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的興趣會(huì)對外國企業(yè)有所幫助。但話說回來，這也意味著要花費(fèi)更多的訴訟費(fèi)用。
超綱詞匯
Royalty n．版稅，特許權(quán)使用費(fèi)
sue vt．／vi．起訴
floppy disk軟盤
appeal vi．上訴
suit n．訴訟
litigation n．訴訟，起訴
infringe vi．違背
violation n．違反，違背，妨礙，侵害
counterfeit n．／adj．贗品,偽造的，假冒的
harbinger n．預(yù)兆，先驅(qū)
resentment n．怨恨，憤恨
patent n．專利權(quán)，執(zhí)照，專利晶
stunt 阻礙生長，阻礙發(fā)展
infringement n．違反，侵害
參考答案：1．D 2．A 3．B 4．C 5．A
Netac claims that PNY has infringed its patent for external flash-memory storage devices，also known as“flash drives”or“key drives”．which have replaced floppy disks as the easiest way to carry data around．It is seeking“significant”(though unspecified)financial damages．The Chinese company obtained a Chinese patent for its technology in 2002 and an American one in 2004．PNY，it says， infringed the later patent，stunting Netac’s growth in the American market for flash drives，which is worth more than$2 billion a year and growing fast．
Litigation，alongside memory chips，appears to be turning into a bit of a speciality for Netac．Over the past three years，the firm has brought patent suits against Hua Qi，a Beijing-based local competitor； Acer of Taiwan；and Sony of Japan．Hua Qi lost，but is appealing Acer has settled；and the Sony suit is ongoing．On the other hand，19 international manufacturers have protested that Netac’s patents are too broad，though around ten others，including Samsung Electronics of South Korea，have been happy to license its technology．
Netac is likely to prove a harbinger．As Chinese companies develop their own patents,copyrights and trademarks and seek to protect them，China as a whole will become more sensitive to the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights(IPR)．“It is an encouraging sign that Chinese companies have become mature in using IPR to protect their interests，”Hu Zuochao，vice-president of the Patent Protection Association of China，told the Chinese media．
If China is indeed taking intellectual property more seriously，that could also be good for foreign investors．The American government estimates that Chinese violations of foreigners’IPR cost international firms at least$60 billion a year as much as the entire annual foreign direct investment into China．But comments such as Mr．Hu’s may also be a signal of what Lester Ross，a lawyer in Beijin9， calls a rising tide of“techno-nationalism”．He predicts growing security fears and resentment over foreigners earning royalties from technology that China could produce itself．This will drive many more Chinese firms to sue foreign ones over patent rights，thinks Mr．Ross who points out that Chinese firms are increasingly confident about using the American courts to fight contract and payment disputes． New Chinese interest in the protection of intellectual property might help foreigners。Then again,it could just mean higher legal bills．[456 words]
1．It is implied in the text that______．
A．China’s IPR has been seriously infringed by foreigners
B．Netac is the only Chinese company to sue an American company
C．the odds are against Netac，which is suing PNY for its infringement
D．few Chinese companies attempted to legally protect its IPR in the past
2．According to the text，Netac______．
A．has won the distinction of speciality for litigation
B．has lost$2 billion because of its patent being infringed
C．has produced the most advanced flash drives in the world
D．has more competitors in IT industry than any other company in China
3．It is predicted that______for patent infringement．
A．Netac is to sue more foreign companies
B．more Chinese companies will sue foreign companies
C．American government will support Netac to sue PNY
D．China has become more sensitive to foreign investors
4．It seems that foreign investors might take a attitude towards China’s protection of its IPR．
A．critical
B．doubtful
C．positive
D．negative
5．It can be inferred from the text that China______．
A．discovers the virtues of intellectual property
B．scarcely violates foreigners’intellectual property rights
C．strictly protects the IPR of the technology it produces
D．strictly protects the IPR of foreign investors in China
難句透析
①A court case[involving counterfeits and China]is nothing new except this time，it is the Chinese company that is doing the suing．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的現(xiàn)在分詞短語“involving counterfeits and China”是“case”的后置定語。下劃線所標(biāo)示的“it is…that…”是強(qiáng)調(diào)句型。
【釋義】一場涉及假冒產(chǎn)品以及中國在內(nèi)的訴訟案并不是什么稀奇的事，但是這次提出訴訟的是中國公司。
②Netac claims[that PNY has infringed its patent for external flash memory storage devices，also known as“flash drives”or“key drives”，(which have replaced floppy disks as the easiest way to carry data around)]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that PNY…around”是“claims”的賓語從句。圓括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“which…around”是“storage devices”的后置定語從句。斜體字所標(biāo)示的過去分詞短語“also known as‘flash drives’or key drives”是“storage devices”的后置定語。
【釋義】朗科科技公司說，美國PNY公司的機(jī)外閃存裝置，也稱之為“閃驅(qū)”或“鑰匙式磁碟”，侵犯了其專利。這種閃存已取代軟盤，成了攜帶資料的最便利方式。
③On the other hand，19 international manufacturers have protested[that Netac’S patents are too broad]，[though around ten others，including Samsung Electronics of South Korea，have been happy to license its technology]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that Netac’s…broad”是“have protested”的賓語從句。方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“though… technology”是整句的讓步狀語從句。這個(gè)讓步狀語從句中的主語是“around ten others”，謂語動(dòng)詞是“have been”。
【釋義】另一方面，19家外國公司提出了*，認(rèn)為朗科的專利適用面過寬。不過，包括韓國三星電子在內(nèi)的大約10家公司樂于承認(rèn)其技術(shù)專利。
④The American government estimates[that Chinese violations of foreigners’IPR cost international firms at least$60 billion a year as much as the entire annual foreign direct investment into China]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that Chinese…into China”是“estimates”的賓語從句。
【釋義】美國政府估計(jì)，中國每年侵犯外國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的行為給跨國公司造成的損失達(dá)600億美元，相當(dāng)于外商對華一年的直接投資額。
⑤He predicts growing security fears and resentment over foreigners earning royalties from technology[that China could produce itself]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】謂語動(dòng)詞“predicts”后面跟有兩個(gè)用“and”連接的并列的賓語“9rowing security fears”和“resentment…produce itself”。現(xiàn)在分詞“growin9”用做定語，修飾“security fears”和“resentment”。方括號(hào)所標(biāo)示的“that China could produce itself”是“technology”的后置定語從句。
【釋義】他預(yù)言中國公司對安全的擔(dān)心會(huì)日益增長，對外國人靠中國人本可以自己開發(fā)的技術(shù)而賺取技術(shù)版稅的不滿將日益高漲。 全文翻譯
一場涉及假冒產(chǎn)品以及中國在內(nèi)的訴訟案并不是什么稀奇的事，但是這次提出訴訟的是中國公司。今年二月，位于深圳的朗科公司將新澤西州PNY科技公司告到了田納西州法庭，據(jù)了解，該公司成為了中國大陸首家起訴美國公司侵犯專利的公司。
朗科科技公司說，美國PNY公司的機(jī)外閃存裝置，也稱之為“閃驅(qū)”或“鑰匙式磁碟”，侵犯了其專利。這種閃存已取代軟盤，成了攜帶資料的最便利方式。該公司正在計(jì)算“重大的”經(jīng)濟(jì)損失，盡管目前還沒有詳細(xì)列出確切的數(shù)目表。這家中國公司在2002年的時(shí)候取得了本國的技術(shù)專利，2004年取得了美國的技術(shù)專利。該公司表示， PNY侵犯了它在美國取得的專利，阻礙了該公司閃驅(qū)在美國市場的增長，損失價(jià)值達(dá)每年20億美元，而該公司閃驅(qū)的發(fā)展速度非?？?。
起訴，如同存儲(chǔ)芯片一樣似乎逐漸成為朗科公司特有的特點(diǎn)。過去3年里，該公司已經(jīng)起訴過國內(nèi)的競爭對手花旗公司(位于北京)，臺(tái)灣的宏基公司以及日本的索尼公司。而在這幾場訴訟戰(zhàn)中，敗訴的花旗仍然在上訴，宏基已經(jīng)調(diào)停，而跟索尼的訴訟仍在進(jìn)行。另一方面，19家外國公司提出了*，認(rèn)為朗科的專利適用面過寬。不過，包括韓國三星電子在內(nèi)的大約10家公司樂于承認(rèn)其技術(shù)專利。
朗科似乎要扮演先驅(qū)者的角色。隨著中國公司發(fā)明了自己的專利、版權(quán)以及商標(biāo)并且積極尋求保護(hù)，整個(gè)中國都會(huì)對知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的保護(hù)以及執(zhí)行保持越來越高的敏感度。中國專利保護(hù)協(xié)會(huì)的副主席Hu Zuochao對中國的媒體表示，中國公司在利用知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)來保護(hù)自己的利益方面已經(jīng)成熟，這是一個(gè)令人鼓舞的跡象。
如果中國真的嚴(yán)肅對待知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)，那么這對于外國投資者來說也是個(gè)好消息。美國政府估計(jì)，中國每年侵犯外國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的行為給跨國公司造成的損失達(dá)600億美元，相當(dāng)于外商對華一年的直接投資額。但是，像Hu先生這樣的評(píng)價(jià)有可能是目前身居北京的Lester Ross律師所說的“本國技術(shù)保護(hù)主義”浪潮來臨的跡象。他預(yù)言中國公司對安全的擔(dān)心會(huì)日益增長，對外國人靠中國人本可以自己開發(fā)的技術(shù)而賺取技術(shù)版稅的不滿將日益高漲。 Ross律師認(rèn)為，此舉就會(huì)讓越來越多的中國公司對外資企業(yè)侵犯專利權(quán)進(jìn)行起訴，而中國公司對利用美國法庭解決合同及支付糾紛日益自信。中國人對知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的興趣會(huì)對外國企業(yè)有所幫助。但話說回來，這也意味著要花費(fèi)更多的訴訟費(fèi)用。
超綱詞匯
Royalty n．版稅，特許權(quán)使用費(fèi)
sue vt．／vi．起訴
floppy disk軟盤
appeal vi．上訴
suit n．訴訟
litigation n．訴訟，起訴
infringe vi．違背
violation n．違反，違背，妨礙，侵害
counterfeit n．／adj．贗品,偽造的，假冒的
harbinger n．預(yù)兆，先驅(qū)
resentment n．怨恨，憤恨
patent n．專利權(quán)，執(zhí)照，專利晶
stunt 阻礙生長，阻礙發(fā)展
infringement n．違反，侵害
參考答案：1．D 2．A 3．B 4．C 5．A