Whose technology is Ash Fusion really?

Brief reply: 1. Gray fusion fluidized-bed powder gasification was first developed by the Shanxi Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, which also filed related patents. 2. Significant intellectual property and patent disputes have arisen during the promotion of the gray fusion fluidized bed powder gasification technology. 3. Currently, the development and construction of a pressurized ash fusion fluidized bed pulverized coal gasification demonstration plant are in progress. It is being developed by the \"Shanxi Pulverized Coal Gasification Engineering Research Center\" and \"Shanxi Tianhe Coal Gasification Technology Co., Ltd.\\", an entity jointly established by Shanxi Jincheng Anthracite Coal Industry Group Co., Ltd. and the Shanxi Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences. 4. Upload a link to the case titled “Patent Infringement Dispute between Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Bohai Chemical Co., Ltd.’s Tianjin Alkali Plant”, so that everyone can gain a comprehensive understanding of this patent dispute. http://www.law-lib.com/cpws/cpws_view.asp?id=200400664273 5. For a comprehensive understanding of gray fusion fluidized-bed pulverized coal gasification, please visit the relevant website of the \"Shanxi Province Pulverized Coal Gasification Engineering Research Center\", where you can find the materials needed by the user. http://www.cgerc.com/untitled/a1.asp This post was last edited by zjyang168168 on 2007-12-26 16:15 ]

The contract signed between Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Bohai Chemical Co., Ltd.’s Tianjin Alkali Plant was invalid; so how did Tianjin Alkali Plant manage to build two 200 T/D furnaces anyway? I checked, and there are two patents registered with the Intellectual Property Office – why is that? Gasification process and equipment for ash-melting fluidized bed at the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences: http://search.sipo.gov.cn/sipo/zljs/hyjs-yx-new.jsp?recid=CN94106781.5&lei*n=fmzl&title ； The multi-gasification industrial production unit for pulverized coal using a gray-viscous circulating fluidized bed, developed by Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. http://search.sipo.gov.cn/sipo/zljs/hyjs-yx-new.jsp?recid=CN03262731.9&lei*n=syxx&title

Without a doubt, it’s from Teacher Wang Yang at the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute; all the other companies are **! Ah, it’s really hard to do things – the Chinese are now infringing on Chinese people’s patents! ! ! ! :@ :Q :'(

In 2003, gray fusion had great potential for expansion; the market prospects were bright and industrialization seemed imminent. Yet, a lawsuit caused its development to be delayed for several years, resulting in a lack of experience and data related to industrialization. With so many domestic coal gasification technologies now available, gray fusion appears somewhat outdated. At that time, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute and Huamei Company jointly established Qinjin Company; working together brought benefits to both parties, while separation would cause harm to both!

By searching China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and based on publicly available domestic literature, it can be concluded that Researcher Wang Yang from the Chinese Academy of Sciences was the first to achieve success. It has been approved by the **Ministry of Science and Technology over the years.

Currently, the gray fusion technology belongs to Shanxi Tianhe Gasification Technology Co., Ltd., a company established through a partnership between Jinmei Group and the Shanxi Institute of Coal Chemistry of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Below is an article that might help in understanding true feelings! “How did the friendly relationship between Qin and Jin turn into a conflict between them? Summary: If a scientific and technological achievement cannot be put into practice in production, no matter how advanced it is or how great its value, it remains nothing but an illusion. Enterprises are the main actors in the innovation system, and they are also the best venues for the transformation of innovations into practical applications. However, since the autumn of 2003, a dispute in China’s chemical industry arising from the successful commercialization of patented technologies has prevented a significant technological innovation that would benefit the country and its people from being widely adopted. The reason is that the shareholders who invested their patents in the company, after the company further developed those patents into industrial products, ended up having the company sued by those very shareholders*... According to a press briefing held by the Shaanxi Provincial Commission for National Defense Science and Technology on January 3, 2005, with the support of relevant ministries and departments as well as Shaanxi Province, the **Torch Program project of 2000, which was a major scientific and technological achievement transformation project in Shaanxi Province — namely the “Industrial Demonstration Project for the Production of Syngas via Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Gasification” — jointly funded and undertaken by Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. and Shaanxi Chenghua Co., Ltd., was a success. It marks that the new generation of coal gasification technology units developed and designed independently in our country has reached international advanced levels. However... The awkward situation: In June 2003, Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. (referred to as Qinjin Company), in line with its business principles, entered into a contract for the licensing of industrial proprietary technology with Tianjin Bohai Chemical Co., Ltd.’s Tianjin Alkali Plant (referred to as Tianjin Alkali Plant). The contract stipulates that Qinjin Company shall provide Tianjin Alkali Plant with technical services and core equipment for an annual production capacity of 80,000 tons of synthetic ammonia, and grant the Tianjin Alkali Plant the right to use these industrialization technologies. At this time, the Shanxi Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences (referred to as Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute), upon learning of this news, believed that the proprietary technologies and core equipment transferred by Qinjin Company were derived from its own patented technology for the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and apparatus\". On September 29 of the same year, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute filed a lawsuit with the Tianjin Second Intermediate People’s Court, alleging that Qinjin Company and Tianjin Alkali Factory had violated the relevant provisions of the Patent Law, and requesting the court to declare the technical contract signed by these two defendants to be invalid and to determine that such actions constituted patent infringement. After responding actively to the lawsuit, Qinjin Company also resorted to legal action; on October 18, 2003, it filed another lawsuit against Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute in the Xi’an Intermediate People’s Court, seeking to have ownership of the patent confirmed. After the courts in the two locations accepted the cases respectively, they issued first-instance judgments on March 18 and April 30, 2004. The Tianjin Second Intermediate People’s Court ruled that the “License Agreement for the Implementation of Industrial Proprietary Technology” signed between Qinjin Company and Tianjin Alkali Plant was invalid ； The actions of Qinjin Company and Tianjin Alkali Plant violated the patent rights of Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute. 　　The Xi’an Intermediate People’s Court ruled that the patent technology for the \"Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Gasification Process and Equipment,\" in which Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute invested in Qinjin Company, constitutes the subject of patent ownership ； The patent owner of the invention patent for “Ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and apparatus” has been changed to Qinjin Company. Although there are clear differences in the specific details of the cases, the two judgments rendered by the courts in those two locations had vastly different legal consequences for Qinjin Company and Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute. The defendants in both cases appealed against the first-instance verdicts. Currently, the Tianjin High People’s Court has ruled to uphold the original judgment in response to the appeal filed by Qinjin Company. The Shaanxi High People’s Court is currently reviewing the appeal filed by the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute. The already finalized judgment means that the parties involved in this lawsuit must now face the fact that Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute, due to its incomplete understanding of the industrialization techniques related to the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment,\" was unable to promote the use of this technology. Qinjin Company, which possesses extensive experience and mastery of the core industrial technologies related to the \"gray fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment,\" is unable to continue promoting these industrially valuable technologies within the relevant sectors. 　　The chain of interests recognized by law: In both Tianjin and Xi’an, the civil litigation cases filed by the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute and Qinjin Company involved the patent technology related to the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\". So people must ask: what exactly is the relationship between the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute, Qinjin Company, and this patented technology? “Patented technology of “Ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and device”: This technology makes full use of fine coal powder with particle sizes of 8 mm or less obtained from mechanized coal mining. By utilizing the principle of jets, it enables the coal particles to break apart in the fluidized bed, allowing volatiles to escape, the coal to be gasified, and the ash to aggregate into balls. Finally, the ash balls are separated from the coal particles, enabling the continuous discharge of low-carbon ash residues. This approach significantly improves the carbon utilization rate, eliminates waste gas emissions, and simplifies the treatment of wastewater. If the bottlenecks to the industrial application of this technology can be overcome, its market prospects will be extremely broad. The Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute is a research institution under the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Research on new coal gasification processes began in 1983. On May 13, 1998, an invention patent was granted for the \"Ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and apparatus\". Qinjin Company is a limited liability company established on July 27, 1999, with approval from the Shaanxi Provincial Administration for Industry and Commerce. Since its establishment, the company has been dedicated to the industrial research, development, and promotion of the \"gray fused-bed fluidized-bed gasification process and equipment\". 　　To clarify the relationship among the three parties, the reporter traced back to 1998, asking why the patent technology related to the \"gray fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\" led to litigation between the Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute and Qinjin Company. 　　Numerous evidences and documents show that on July 16, 1998, Shaanxi Huaxiang Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. (formerly known as Shaanxi Huamei New Era Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd., abbreviated as Huamei Company) entered into a \"Agreement on Cooperation in Promoting Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Gasification Technology\" with Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute, reaching an agreement to jointly invest in establishing a company to further research, develop, and promote powder coal gasification technology. Subsequently, the two parties approached three individual shareholders, and Qinjin Company was officially established on July 27, 1999. During its establishment, Shanxi Coal Chemical Industry used its patented technology for the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\" as capital contribution in the form of equity. 　　In March prior to this, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute commissioned Shaanxi Huaxing Accounting Firm to evaluate its patented technologies, and provided all the legal documents and technical materials required for such an evaluation. On April 23, 1999, the \"Asset Appraisal Report\" issued by Shaanxi Huaxing Accounting Firm assessed the value of this patented technology at 332,000 yuan. This is an assessment based on the market value of that patent at the time. The reporter saw the resolution of the shareholders’ meeting held regarding the evaluation report, along with the signatures and seals of various shareholders including Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute, which confirmed that this was an evaluation report that had been explicitly approved by all shareholders at that time. 　　Subsequently, Shanxi Coal Chemical Institute determined the value of the patent technology at 324,000 yuan as the asset value for investment, agreed to establish Qinjin Company, and signed the company establishment application and articles of association. After the company was established, Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute officially became a shareholder of Qinjin Company, holding 30% of the company’s registered capital. At the first general meeting of shareholders held by Qinjin Company, Zhang Jianmin and Wang Yang from Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute were elected as company directors as representatives of the shareholders.  Thus, the interest chain established between the Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute and Qinjin Company through the patent technology related to the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\" was formally formed and confirmed in legal terms. 　　The huge market beyond the bottleneck 　　To accelerate the transition of the \"gray pyrolytic fluidized bed gasification\" technology to industrial application. Qinjin Company has successively signed confidentiality and cooperation agreements with entities such as the Central and Western Coal Gasification Center, China Hualu Engineering Corporation, and Shaanxi Chenghua Co., Ltd., and has invested substantial human, material, and financial resources in the preliminary work for industrialization demonstrations. 　　From 1999 to 2001, the relevant departments in Shaanxi Province invested 5 million yuan, while Qinjin Company and Shaanxi Chenghua Co., Ltd. jointly invested 24 million yuan to build an industrial demonstration plant for producing syngas through pulverized coal gasification. After more than three years, and through the coordination and cooperation of various parties, success was finally achieved in starting up the complete set of equipment for this industrialization demonstration project, thus fulfilling the objectives set out in the Torch Program for 2000 as well as the major science and technology industrialization projects in Shaanxi Province. On March 25, 2002, the Science and Technology Department of Shaanxi Province conducted an evaluation of the industrialization achievements related to the \"Industrial Demonstration Project for Synthesis Gas Production via Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Powder Coal Gasification\", and issued a \"Certificate of Evaluation of Scientific and Technological Achievements\" to Qinjin Company and Shaanxi Chenghua Co., Ltd. It also marks Qinjin Company’s breakthrough over the bottleneck challenges associated with the industrial application of the patent technology related to the \"gray fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment,\" enabling this technology to be truly transformed into a source of productivity. 　　After the successful operation of the industrial demonstration unit, this equipment and technology were recognized by relevant industries. To date, more than 50 users have come for discussions and to utilize the service, with the expected value exceeding 1 billion RMB. With the continuous improvement and dissemination of industrialization technologies, it will ultimately become the replacement equipment and technology for clean energy power generation in China, as well as for industries such as metallurgy, light industry, building materials, and urban gas. A potential market share of nearly 10 billion yuan awaits further development by Qinjin Company. 　　The conflict between Qinjin and Jin blocked a market worth billions. Just as Qinjin Company was taking steady steps to further develop this market, it faced an unexpected internal setback: Shanxi Coal Chemical Industry, one of Qinjin’s shareholders, sued the company for \"violating patent rights\" in connection with the collaboration aimed at promoting this technology. 　　In June 2003, Tianjin Alkali Plant agreed to pay the relevant party the \"industrial proprietary technology licensing fee\" and the \"process design software package fee\", on the condition that Qinjin Company would be responsible for constructing a gray fused-bed gasification unit capable of producing 80,000 tons per year of synthetic ammonia feed gas, and would provide the necessary technical data and information. In September, Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute, which is the second-largest shareholder of Qinjin Company, saw the huge economic value inherent in the patent technology for the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment,\" and despite its status as a shareholder, it sued Qinjin Company in court. Claiming ownership of the patent technology for the “gray melt fluidized bed gasification process and equipment,” Qinjin Company only holds the right to use it.  In the subsequent series of lawsuits, the focus of the court’s proceedings was on the dispute regarding whether, at the time of its establishment, Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute invested by owning or by having the right to use the patent technology related to the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\". 　　So, should one invest by owning the rights or by having the right to use them? The problem arose because, in the cooperation agreement for establishing Qinjin Company, Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute’s investment was described as a right to use technology, whereas in Qinjin Company’s articles of association and resolutions of the shareholders’ meeting, it was referred to as patented technology; there is a discrepancy between the descriptions in these two documents, which were issued within a year of each other. As a journalist who studies law, I am well aware that among the forms of investment specified in Article 24 of China’s Company Law is industrial property rights; patents fall under industrial property rights, and they represent rights of a proprietary nature, rather than patents that are merely rights of use. The reason why the Company Law, as a special law, does not recognize patent usage rights as a form of investment is that such investments are essentially debt-based investments, and the Company Law does not permit the use of debts as investments ； After making an investment, shareholders shall not engage in competition with the company they established through that investment. If patent ownership remains with the shareholders, it will inevitably lead to competition between them and the company they created, violating this fundamental provision of the Company Law. If the right to use a patent is recognized as an investment in the company, then in the event of the company’s bankruptcy, it means that shareholders who have invested in such patent rights can retrieve those patents, which is unfair to both creditors and other shareholders. The relevant meeting minutes of the Supreme People’s Court do not explicitly affirm that the right to use a patent can serve as an independent form of investment; rather, they state that in judicial practice, when a case involves investment using the right to use a patent, the investor should be prohibited from using that technology themselves. This view is actually aimed at correcting the harms of such an investment approach on the basis of maintaining transaction stability; it is not about adding a new type of investment option for companies, nor can it be interpreted as the Supreme Court endorsing investments using patent rights. 　　But the current situation is that, due to the dispute over the words “all” and “use,” it is no longer possible to enter into a market share worth hundreds of millions of yuan that has already been established. It is regrettable that the \"primary productive force,\" which embodies the collective wisdom of many people and has been successfully transformed into an industrial application, fails to realize its full potential. 　　Is it a violation of patent rights or insufficient technical investment? Before the establishment of Qinjin Company, Shaanxi Huamei New Era Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. (one of the shareholders) signed a \"Cooperation Agreement for the Promotion of Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Pulverized Coal Gasification Technology\" with Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute. This agreement was essentially an \"initiator’s agreement\" between the two parties to establish Qinjin Company. Although it stated that Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute would invest by providing access to its technology, the company’s articles of association stipulated that the investment would be in the form of technology, valued at 324,000 yuan. Legal experts argue that regarding the provisions on the rights and obligations of the parties to an \"initiator agreement,\" the date of company establishment serves as a dividing point: the obligations previously stipulated in the agreement are replaced by legal obligations governed by the \"articles of association\" signed jointly by the shareholders. “If the “founders’ agreement” differs from the “articles of association” governing the establishment of a company, the provisions of the articles of association shall prevail; this is a fundamental principle of the Company Law. Meanwhile, as a patented technology contributed by the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute for the registration of Qinjin Company, its full property value was subject to a rigorous asset appraisal in accordance with the Company Law; the results of this appraisal were then unanimously approved by all shareholders. This is an undeniable fact. 　　Therefore, the legal procedure of using patented technology as capital contribution by the coal chemical institute is fully in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Company Law. Therefore, it should be determined that the investment by the Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute in Qinjin Company’s patent technologies shall be governed by the explicit provisions of the resolutions of the shareholders’ meeting as stipulated in the articles of association; in other words, it is an investment in patent technologies in the sense of property rights, rather than an investment in the right to use patents as mentioned in the \"founders’ agreement\". Therefore, it is reasonable and lawful for Qinjin Company to request the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute to complete the patent transfer procedures as soon as possible. The judgment rendered by the Xi’an Intermediate People’s Court is fully grounded in legal provisions. 　　At present, this case has drawn widespread attention from all sectors of society. It is expected that in a market economy, all stakeholders shall adhere to the principle of integrity and regulate and restrain their market behavior in accordance with the law. At the same time, while safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of patent holders, the people’s courts must also protect the legitimate rights of enterprises that make significant contributions to technology transfer, in order to promote the rapid transformation of such scientific and technological achievements that benefit both the country and its people, thereby bringing benefits to society. Otherwise, any erroneous judgment resulting from human factors could cause irreparable damage to patent holders and companies involved in development and promotion, which is utterly detrimental to **. 　　News Link ①: Clearer guidelines from the Supreme People’s Court On November 30, 2004, the 1335th meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People’s Court adopted the \"Interpretations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Technical Contract Disputes.\" Article 16 provides a clear stipulation on this matter: \"Where a party contributes technical achievements as capital to an enterprise without clearly specifying ownership, and the enterprise that receives such contributions claims that it shall own those technical achievements, the people’s court shall generally grant such claim.\" In a press briefing held by Jiang Zhipei, head of the Third Civil Division of the Supreme People’s Court, regarding the \"Interpretations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Disputes over Technical Contract Agreements,\" it was clearly stated that in line with the legislative spirit of laws such as the Company Law and the Partnership Law, and taking into account the fact that technical contributions are different from funds and physical assets, as well as trade practices, it is generally recognized that technical contributions involve the investment of the overall rights related to the technology in the entity receiving the investment. 　　News Link ② Coal is the most abundant fossil resource in China and the world, accounting for over 70% of China’s primary energy consumption. According to experts’ predictions, oil can be exploited for about 40 years, natural gas for about 60 years, while coal can be mined for over 200 years. Therefore, China’s energy structure, which is dominated by coal, is unlikely to change for a long time to come; coal remains an important pillar for the rapid economic development of China in the 21st century. Actively developing clean coal technology holds great strategic and practical significance for environmental protection and sustainable development, and coal gasification is an effective way to utilize clean coal technology. Currently, the **National Development and Reform Commission has listed this technology as one of the recommended technologies under the \"Special Project for Adjusting Raw Materials and Energy Structures in the Nitrogen Fertilizer Industry,\" and has allocated 16.2 billion yuan to support its promotion. More than 700 chemical enterprises are expected to achieve local sourcing of raw coal, which will generate favorable economic benefits for these companies; it will also enable farmers to purchase fertilizers at lower prices, thus helping to address the issues related to agriculture, rural areas, and farmers. 　　News Link ③ Article 24 of the Company Law of the People’s Republic of China states that “shareholders may contribute capital in monetary form, or they may also contribute assets such as physical goods, industrial property rights, non-patented technologies, or land use rights at an appraised value.” For assets such as physical assets, industrial property rights, non-patented technologies, or land use rights contributed as capital, an evaluation must be carried out to determine their value; the assets must be assessed accurately, with no overvaluation or undervaluation allowed. 　　Article 25 of the Company Law of the People’s Republic of China stipulates that \"where contributions are made in the form of physical assets, industrial property rights, non-patented technologies, or land use rights, the procedures for transferring ownership of such assets shall be carried out in accordance with the law.\" Article 61 of the Company Law of the People’s Republic of China stipulates that “directors and managers shall not engage in business activities of the same kind as those of the company they work for on their own or for others, nor shall they engage in activities that harm the interests of the company.” ” 　　News Link ④: On September 13, 2004, the Shaanxi Provincial Commission for National Defense Science, Technology and Industry invited a number of legal experts from Northwest University of Political Science and Law, Northwest University, Xi’an Jiaotong University, as well as renowned lawyers, to hold a symposium on the dispute regarding patent technology investment between Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Qinjin Company) and the Shanxi Institute of Coal Chemistry of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (hereinafter referred to as the Coal Chemistry Institute). Based on the litigation evidence and relevant legal documents provided by both parties, the experts present offered the following legal opinions. 　　I. The core issue in the litigation concerning this case is whether the patent technology related to the \"Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Gasification Process and Equipment\" constitutes a form of investment by the Coal Chemistry Institute in Qinjin Company’s industrial property rights; clearly, this patent technology represents an investment in the sense of intellectual property rights (i.e., ownership). 　　II. Regarding the \"Agreement on Cooperation to Promote the Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Pulverized Coal Gasification Technology\" signed between Shaanxi Huamei New Era Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. (one of the shareholders of Qinjin Company) and the Coal Chemistry Research Institute prior to the establishment of Qinjin Company, this agreement was essentially a \"founder’s agreement\" between the two parties aimed at establishing Qinjin Company. Although the agreement stated that \"Party B (i.e., the Coal Chemistry Research Institute) would invest by providing access to its technical expertise,\" the company’s articles of association later specified that the Coal Chemistry Research Institute would invest by contributing patented technologies, valued at 324,000 yuan. The validity of the founder’s agreement regarding the rights and obligations of the parties should be considered as of the date the company was established; the obligations stipulated in the original agreement were replaced by legal obligations outlined in the articles of association, which were signed by all shareholders. “If the “founders’ agreement” differs from the “articles of association” governing the establishment of a company, the provisions of the articles of association shall prevail; this is a fundamental principle of the Company Law. Therefore, it should be determined that the Coalification Research Institute’s investment in Qinjin Company’s patented technologies is governed by the explicit provisions of the articles of association; in other words, it is an investment in patented technologies in the sense of property rights, rather than a contribution in the form of patent usage rights as stated in the founders’ agreement. 　　III. The Coalification Research Institute shall, in accordance with the provisions of the Company Law, fulfill its statutory obligations toward Qinjin Company by going through the procedures for \"registration of changes in industrial property rights.\" Failing to do so constitutes a violation of the statutory obligation to contribute capital to the company; in such cases where the capital contribution obligations are not fully fulfilled, Qinjin Company has the right to file a lawsuit at any time to demand that the Institute fulfill its capital contribution obligations. 　　IV. The purpose of establishing Qinjin Company, as well as the business activities specified in its registration, is to utilize the patent technologies invested by the Coal Chemistry Institute in this company in order to \"accelerate their introduction to the market\" as well as to carry out the development, production, and promotion of related equipment. Therefore, the transfer of the complete sets of equipment and technologies developed based on these patent technologies by Qinjin Company for external use, along with their production, sales, and further development, does not constitute any infringement of the Coal Chemistry Institute’s patents. 　　Experts urge that the successful industrial development of this technology is in line with **policies for sustainable energy and environmental development as well as the spirit of the Central Government’s Document No. 1 of 2004; it holds great significance for saving energy, protecting the environment, and addressing issues related to agriculture, rural areas, and farmers. In particular, the relevant authorities in Shaanxi Province have invested nearly 30 million yuan in the industrialization of this technology; the industrialized version of this technology is now ready for commercial use, and it will bring significant economic and social benefits to coal chemical enterprises as well as chemical manufacturing industries in Shaanxi and across the country. It is hoped that the court will, in handling this case, protect the interests of the enterprise in a legal, reasonable, and fair manner, so that this high-tech technology, which is beneficial to the country, the people, and the development of enterprises, can be brought to market as soon as possible to benefit humanity. 　　Is it a patent infringement or insufficient investment in technology? 　　Investigation into the technical dispute over the \"gray fusion\" gasification technology at Shaanxi Qinjin Company. This is a technical property rights dispute that has attracted widespread attention in China’s chemical industry at present. It has attracted widespread attention because this newly developed technology, which is already mature in terms of industrial application, is involved in property rights disputes. It not only holds a market potential of over 10 billion yuan in our country, but also plays an important role in alleviating energy shortages and accelerating the development of **gasification projects. 　　On July 16, 1998, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (hereinafter referred to as the Coal Chemistry Institute) and Shaanxi Huamei New Era Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Huamei Company) signed an Agreement on Cooperation in Promoting the Ash Fusion Fluidized Bed Pulverized Coal Gasification Technology. The two parties agreed in the agreement to jointly invest in establishing \"Shaanxi Qinjin Gasification Engineering Equipment Co., Ltd.\" (hereinafter referred to as Qinjin Company). The gasification company would contribute its technology related to the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\", for which patents exist, holding 30% of the shares in Qinjin Company, while Huamei Company would contribute cash, holding 70% of the shares. The business philosophy of Qinjin Company is to promote equipment manufactured based on the technology of \"gray fused bed gasification process and devices,\" and to provide relevant technical services to organizations that choose to use such equipment. 　　Following the signing of this cooperation agreement, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute and Shaanxi Huamei Company conducted further discussions, entering the practical stage of establishing the company. In April 1999, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute, Huamei Company, and three other individuals jointly signed the articles of association for Qinjin Company. The company was registered with a capital of 1.08 million yuan, with the investment contributions determined as follows: the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute contributed its expertise related to the \"ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment,\" while the other parties made investments in cash. 　　In accordance with the articles of association and regulations such as the Company Law, Shaanxi Huaxing Accounting Firm conducted a value assessment of the patent technology related to the \"Ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\" on April 23, 1999. The conclusion of this assessment report is: “The patent technology assessed at the request of the client has a fair value of RMB 332,422.00 as of the assessment date.” The Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute has never raised any objections to these evaluation results. 　　On April 25, 1999, the investors convened a shareholders’ meeting for Qinjin Company, at which it was resolved that the technology invested by Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute was a patented technology. In July 1999, Qinjin Company was officially established after registering with the Shaanxi Provincial Administration for Industry and Commerce. However, the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute failed to transfer the patented technology it had invested in the company – namely the \"Ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and equipment\" – to the newly registered Qinjin Company, as required by the Company Law. In the following years, despite repeated urging from the company, the transfer of ownership was not completed, which inadvertently created obstacles to the company’s subsequent marketing and development efforts. 　　After its establishment in Xi’an, with the support of the ** provincial authorities and relevant departments in Shaanxi Province, Qinjin Company hired a number of chemical engineering experts and laboratory technicians. After several years of work, it succeeded in developing an industrial-scale set of equipment for the production of syngas through gray melting fluidized-bed gasification, building upon the original patented technology. This enabled this patented technology to reach a level where it could be produced on an industrial scale and brought to market. 　　In April 2002, this technological achievement, which had been fully ready for industrial production, passed an expert evaluation organized by the Science and Technology Department of Shaanxi Province, where the company is located, and received a certificate recognizing its status as a scientific and technological achievement. 　　Since this technical achievement was realized under the overall coordination of Qinjin Company at Shaanxi Chenghua Company, the entities listed as those responsible for its completion on the certification issued by the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Science and Technology are naturally Qinjin Company, which holds shares in the Coal Chemistry Institute, and Chenghua Company, the entity that carried out the work. In June 2003, in line with its business philosophy, Qinjin Company entered into a license agreement for the implementation of industrial proprietary technology with Tianjin Alkali Plant. Under this agreement, Qinjin Company was to provide Tianjin Alkali Plant with technical services and core equipment necessary for producing 80,000 tons of synthetic ammonia per year, granting the plant the right to use this industrial technology. 　　Upon learning of this, Shanxi Coal Chemical, which already had reservations toward the company, immediately filed a lawsuit in the Second Intermediate People’s Court of Tianjin, naming Qinjin Company and Tianjin Alkali Plant as defendants on the grounds of infringement of its patent rights. It sought to have the contract for licensing industrial proprietary technology signed between Qinjin Company and Tianjin Alkali Plant declared invalid, and for the two defendants to cease their infringing activities, in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the patent holder. 　　After receiving a copy of the lawsuit, Qinjin Company actively participated in the defense in order to protect its interests. It was stated to the Second Intermediate People’s Court of Tianjin that the Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute had invested the patented technology in Qinjin Company, and a request was made to suspend the patent infringement lawsuit already under consideration by that court. At the same time, it sued Shanxi Coal Chemical Institute in the Xi’an Intermediate People’s Court, citing the failure of the institute to fulfill its obligations as well as the provisions of its corporate bylaws. The lawsuit sought to have it confirmed that the technology in which it had invested was a patented technology, to verify the legality of Qinjin Company’s sales of equipment containing such technology and its provision of technical services, and to require Shanxi Coal Chemical Institute to comply with its corporate bylaws by transferring ownership of the patented technology it had invested in to Qinjin Company. 　　In hearing the patent infringement case involving Qinjin Company, the Second Intermediate People’s Court of Tianjin did not accept the claim made repeatedly by Qinjin Company that the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute had invested its patent technology in the company. Ruling on March 18, 2004, that Qinjin Company and others had infringed upon the patent rights of the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute, the court held that what the institute had invested in Qinjin Company was not the patent rights themselves, but only the right to use those patent technologies. The court also declared invalid the contract under which Qinjin Company was granted permission to use such technologies from Tianjin Alkali Plant. 　　Not long after the judgment was rendered by the Second Intermediate People’s Court of Tianjin, on April 30 the Intermediate People’s Court of Xi’an issued a first-instance ruling in the case filed by Qinjin Company against Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute regarding patent rights investment. The court confirmed that the patent technology related to the \"Ash fusion fluidized bed gasification process and apparatus\" belonged to Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute, and that the patent rights should be transferred to Qinjin Company. 　　After the judgments issued by the Second Intermediate People’s Court of Tianjin and the Xi’an Intermediate People’s Court were delivered, Qinjin Company and Tianjin Alkali Plant filed appeals against these judgments with the Higher People’s Court of Tianjin, respectively, while Shanxi Coal Chemical Research Institute filed an appeal with the Higher People’s Court of Shaanxi Province. 　　At present, due to the lengthy legal proceedings, Qinjin Company and Shaanxi Chenghua Co., Ltd., which invested nearly 30 million yuan in the promotion and development of industrialization technologies, are unable to operate normally and have fallen into difficulties. At the same time, a major scientific and technological achievement that is beneficial to the country and its people cannot be properly promoted and put into use. 　　In this patent rights dispute, the focus of the controversy is whether patent usage rights can serve as a form of investment when establishing a company If it is used as a form of investment, how can it be regulated after investment in a company, and how can the legitimate rights and interests of the patent holder and the company be ensured? When the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute initially invested in Qinjin Company, did it do so by obtaining the right to use patent technologies or the actual ownership of those patents? 　　Among the forms of investment specified in Article 24 of China’s Company Law is industrial property rights, and patents fall under industrial property rights; they represent rights of a proprietary nature, rather than rights of a right-to-use nature. The reason why the Company Law does not recognize patent usage rights as a form of investment is that such investments are essentially debt-based investments, and the Company Law does not permit debt to be used as an investment instrument ； The Company Law also stipulates that, after making an investment, shareholders may not engage in competition with the company they established through that investment; if patent ownership remains with the shareholders, it will inevitably lead to competition between them and the company they founded. Furthermore, if the company goes bankrupt, shareholders who have invested in the patent usage rights can retrieve the patents, which is unfair to creditors and other shareholders. 　　Therefore, Qinjin Company believes that it is not a matter of infringement or non-infringement; the key issue is that the necessary investments were not made, which represents a lack of integrity. The Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute has invested its patented technologies in a company; now, in accordance with the Company Law and the company’s articles of association, it is necessary to promptly establish legal ownership rights, transfer the property rights to those patented technologies to the company in which it has made the investment, and fulfill its obligations as a shareholder. 　　To this day, this dispute continues. Faced with this situation, many people feel regretful, while businesses are even more distressed. Recently, regarding this property rights dispute, several veteran colleagues from Shaanxi Province who were involved in the **gasification project wrote a joint letter to the relevant authorities, stating: “Shaanxi Qinjin Company made great efforts and invested over 6 million yuan to transform the patent into an industrial technology; yet instead of receiving any rewards, it found itself trapped in endless property rights disputes.” This is unfair to businesses, and it will also cause significant losses to **. ” 　　At present, this case has drawn widespread attention from all sectors of society. It is expected that in a market economy, all stakeholders shall adhere to the principle of integrity and regulate and restrain their market behavior in accordance with the law. Especially in Shaanxi, a province renowned for its strengths in science and education, many scientific research achievements are produced each year. Most of these achievements are of a laboratory nature, and how to transform them into real productive forces is a matter of great concern for everyone involved. This requires extensive participation from enterprises; at the same time, enterprises need to have a spirit of risk-taking and technological innovation. It is also very important to facilitate the transition from laboratory results to industrialized technologies, and this is precisely where the difficulties in transforming scientific and technical achievements lie. 　　Fortunately, Article 16 of the \"Interpretations of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Technical Contract Disputes,\" adopted at the 1335th meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People’s Court on November 30, 2004, states that \"where a party contributes technical achievements as capital to an enterprise without clearly specifying ownership, and the enterprise that receives such contributions claims that it should own those technical achievements, the people’s court shall generally grant such claim.\" In a press briefing held by Jiang Zhipei, head of the Third Civil Division of the Supreme People’s Court, regarding the \"Interpretations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Disputes over Technical Contract Agreements,\" it was clearly stated that in line with the legislative spirit of laws such as the Company Law and the Partnership Law, and taking into account the fact that technical contributions are different from funds and physical assets, as well as trade practices, it is generally recognized that technical contributions involve the investment of the overall rights related to the technology in the entity receiving the investment. 　　As for how this dispute will end, the court will render its judgment. Experts point out that this significant achievement in the transformation of scientific and technological innovations, which is beneficial to the country and its people, can bear fruit in more industries as soon as possible and be turned into productive forces, thereby promoting the development of coal gasification technology and the chemical industry in our country in a positive direction. This is what the world is most concerned about.     Source: China Enterprise Rights Protection Network

It doesn’t matter who actually owns the technology behind current gray fusion polymerization – it’s all Chinese innovation! What is important is to ensure that \"Hui Rongju\" – this technology with independent intellectual property rights in our country, which is already fragile and has suffered great damage as a result of various adverse factors – can receive care from its family and society, recover quickly, regain its strength, and be able to stand on its own feet in the field of coal chemical industry and secure a place for itself. This is the most important thing! ! ! Whether it is the “Coal Chemistry Institute” in Taiyuan or companies like “Qinjin” and “Qineng” in Xi’an, they all need to face this reality. “\"Gray fusion\" is indeed outdated! Unity leads to progress; friendship ensures shared prosperity ； Conflict leads to mutual defeat; fighting with each other causes harm to both sides!

This is a typical example of infighting. These companies don’t understand what invention really is; they think that working together means co-creating something. This phenomenon is very common, which makes technological progress difficult. China is inadequate in protecting intellectual property, mainly because it fails to tell people from the very beginning that \"invention and creation\" are expressions of thought, rather than something that requires collective effort.

You should read more literature, preferably some foreign publications, to fully understand the history of gray compositing technology before speaking. Please refer to: http://bbs.hcbbs.com/viewthread.php?tid=422824&page=1&extra=page%3D1. The situation regarding gray polymerization in China seems to be quite complex. Units related to gray fusion technology: Shanxi Coal Chemical, Qinjin Company, Qinen Tianji Company, and US SES. The patent dispute between the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Research Institute and Qinjin Company sees each side holding its own arguments, and the conflict seems to still be ongoing ； In terms of pressurization, Qin Neng Tianji Company is taking the lead in carrying out industrial demonstration projects, and Shanxi Coal Chemical Industry also conducted pilot tests on pressurization. The entry of the American company SES into the domestic market disrupted the existing market landscape. Initially, SES was very active, but now, due to the economic crisis, its activities have almost come to a halt. Let’s wait and see what will happen in the future! This post was last edited by haichuaner on 2009-3-22 22:30]

It is the achievement of a research team led by Professor Wang Yang from the Shanxi Coal Chemistry Institute; however, I personally believe that there are still many key issues that have not been resolved.

What does it mean that the weak SES action is very large?

It’s all about interests; before it even succeeds, they want to have exclusivity, which is why it fails