Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

China Proposes Harsher Penalties for Trade Secret Theft in Draft Amendment

By Molly A. Jones & Julia Milewski on July 17, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

China’s National People’s Congress has released a draft law for comment that would impose harsher criminal penalties for any trade secret theft from Chinese companies that benefits foreign companies.

China’s current law imposes a maximum sentence of 3 years imprisonment for “serious” instances and 10 years for “particularly serious” instances of trade secret theft. The proposed law would impose harsher sentences for trade secret theft benefiting a foreign entity, resulting in 5 years for “serious” instances and a minimum of 5 years with no maximum for “particularly serious” instances. The proposed law applies to any individual or company that “steals, spies, buys, or illegally provides trade secrets to foreign institutions, organisations, and personnel,” which can include electronic intrusion. The proposed change in the Chinese criminal code mirrors the U.S. Economic Espionage Act, which contains separate provisions for trade secret theft generally regardless of beneficiary and trade secret theft benefiting a foreign government, instrumentality, or agent. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831, 1832.

The proposed amendment is made against the backdrop of recent deteriorating relations between China and the United States and an exponential increase in Department of Justice prosecutions of Chinese individuals and entities for alleged trade secret misappropriation under the Economic Espionage Act. This latest development may signal a “tit-for-tat” approach to foreign relations and a desire to impose harsher penalties and increase prosecutions against foreign companies.

The deadline to comment on the proposed law is August 16, 2020.

Photo of Molly A. Jones Molly A. Jones

Molly A. Jones is an Intellectual Property and Litigation counsel in Crowell & Moring’s San Francisco office. Her practice emphasizes patent, trademark, technology licensing, and other commercial disputes in a range of industries including software, biotechnology, commercial real estate, education, health care, and…

Molly A. Jones is an Intellectual Property and Litigation counsel in Crowell & Moring’s San Francisco office. Her practice emphasizes patent, trademark, technology licensing, and other commercial disputes in a range of industries including software, biotechnology, commercial real estate, education, health care, and food and beverage. She has represented clients in matters in the Northern, Eastern, and Southern Districts of California, Eastern District of Texas, and California state courts. Molly has also second-chaired a trademark infringement trial in the Western District of Texas.

Molly earned her J.D., cum laude, from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where she was the executive symposium editor of the Hastings Law Journal and co-authored amicus curiae briefs in two landmark patent cases at the U.S. Supreme Court. While attending law school, Molly also externed at the Northern District of California and studied abroad at Sungkyunkwan University in Seoul, South Korea.

Read more about Molly A. JonesEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Julia Milewski Julia Milewski
Read more about Julia MilewskiEmail
  • Posted in:
    Antitrust, Competition and Trade
  • Blog:
    Trade Secrets Trends
  • Organization:
    Crowell & Moring LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo