Skip To Main Content
Chi-Ying Lee on Muck Rack

Chi-Ying Lee

As seen in: MDPI, Science Magazine, Lexology, Intellectual Asset Management (IAM)
Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work. Claim your profile

Get in touch with Chi-Ying

Contact Chi-Ying, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.

Learn more about Muck Rack

Actions

Share this page

Is this you?

As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile

Articles

IP court ruling cements strict stance on employer’s duty to prevent employee copyright infringement in Taiwan 

|
By Jane Wang, Chi-Ying Lee
| Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) Verified
Shutterstock/khunkornStudio A recent Taiwan IP Court ruling has clarified that there is a relatively broad standard when it comes to assessing an employer’s duty to prevent employee copyright infringement (2012 Min Zhu Su 52). The court ruled that simply putting forward an IT policy against illegal software may not be enough to protect a company from being held liable for employee infringement.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

Transcriptomic Analysis of Vitrified-Warmed vs. Fresh Mouse Blastocysts: Cryo-Induced Physiological Mechanisms and Im-Plantation Impact

|
By Chi-Ying Lee, En-Hui Cheng, Tsung-Hsien Lee, Han-Ni Tsai
| MDPI
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

IP court provides much-needed clarity on distinction between novelty and fictitious novelty

|
By Jane Wang, Chi-Ying Lee
| Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) Verified
Jane Wang and Chi-Ying Lee Formosa Transnational 02 August 2023 Taiwan’s IP Court has clarified the distinction between the novelty requirement under Article 22(1) and the "lack of novelty based on legal fiction" criteria under Article 23 of the Patent Act.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?
See all 8 articles