This chapter first retraces the origins and evolution of the community of shared future for mankind (CSFM) terminology up to its incorporation in the preamble to the Chinese Constitution, while highlighting its centrality in XI Jinping’s ‘Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era’. The chapter then examines the main tenets of the CSFM, which is portrayed as a symbol of China’s commitment to fostering a ‘new development paradigm and pursuing mutual benefit and win–win cooperation’ on a global scale, on the basis of XI Jinping’s writings. In doing this, it pays particular attention to how the CSFM builds on some of the fundamental principles of international law and how it is furthermore being fleshed out through various international legal initiatives. To better illustrate this analysis, the chapter conceptually analyzes the nine core elements of the CSFM with the visual aid of the metaphoric architectural form of a ‘paifang’. The chapter concludes by pointing to some factors weighing in favour of China’s further deepening its legalist approach to international relations as the most fitting companion to its grand strategy of ‘peaceful/development rise’.

Intellectual property (IP) often conjures up images of blockbuster Hollywood movies, bestselling novels, pharmaceutical drugs, or new technologies like Bluetooth or drones. When people think of intellectual property, some immediately think about the protections rather than the other half of the equation: access. Because patents and copyright are infused in so much of our daily life in today’s digital, highly technological world, ensuring equitable access has become an increasingly important part of the IP debate.

American copyright embraces all kinds of creative expression, howsoever such expression might be documented. Despite the comprehensive scope of American copyright, it has at times been misconstrued to exclude some modes of creative expression. This chapter examines the adverse intellectual property social justice (IP-SJ) impacts of the requirement of written notation to obtain a United States copyright in a musical composition in place until 1978, and still affecting a vast number of valuable works. IP-SJ1 requires that everyone be included, empowered, and provided the ability to express themselves and to profit therefrom, even if the music does not arise out of or comport with European classical music traditions and mechanisms, especially written notation.

Since adopting its reform and opening-up policy in the 1970s, China has steadily expanded its relationship with international institutions and transformed its role from passive norm-follower to active norm-maker in the new international order. China’s move to international institutions is characterized by: (1) an economic-led approach to participation; (2) diverse forms of participation; (3) participation on the basis of sovereign equality and peaceful coexistence; and (4) the aim of a fair, transparent international order that considers the interests of developing countries. While China is maintaining its basic position of compliance with existing international rules, its norm-making efforts are demonstrated through its initiatives to establish new international institutional networks. This chapter further examines China’s norm-making role in three major international arenas: peace and security, economic development, and environment and sustainable development. It testifies vividly to China’s increase in soft power as it leads the transition from Western-led global governance to a global co-governance system in which all members of the international community participate.

Extraterritorial jurisdiction of Chinese law has received increased attention in recent years. On 25 February 2019, President Xi Jinping called for fast-track institution building in extraterritorial jurisdiction of Chinese law. It is the first time that China has made such a bold claim from the very top level of the leadership. This chapter offers a critical examination of Chinese practice in relation to effect-based extraterritorial jurisdiction. It focusses on three fields of law dealing with offensive maps, marine environment protection, and anti-monopoly in which a number of cases have been handled by Chinese executive authorities and courts. It not only looks at how such rules are prescribed in black-letter law but also surveys and reviews how such jurisdiction has been enforced in practice. It attempts to evaluate how successful is China’s approach towards effect-based extraterritorial jurisdiction and to offer some insights into the future development of this significant area of Chinese law.

Theories of social justice open interesting avenues for both research in and development of intellectual property (IP) law. They provide new normative and policy foundations, looking beyond traditional perspectives rooted in Locke, utilitarianism, wealth-maximization, natural rights, or economic theories of efficiency. But as with all these established approaches, social justice runs the risk of turning routine. One example of the strengths and pitfalls of social justice thinking is the custom-fit movement, the subject of this chapter. My contribution is to invigorate social justice thinking by exploring “social justice in action” through the example of the custom-fit movement.

This Handbook aims to provide much-needed clarity in regard to China’s renewed proactive engagement with international law and international institutions and how China assimilates into, and how it may intend to put its stamp on, international law by offering an updated and fairly comprehensive perspective on the multifaceted contemporary engagement of China with different areas of the international legal order. In order to do this, it disaggregates China’s relationship with international law into different topical areas,each of which is covered by one of the eight thematic parts of the Handbook. These offer specialized treatments of China’s relationship with international human rights law, international trade law, the law of the sea, international criminal law, international investment law, climate change law and international dispute settlement, among many others.

We are just at the beginning of the AI revolution and already it is transforming human society.2 In history, only four other technologies have transformed human life as profoundly as AI will: steam power that powered the industrial revolution; electricity that transformed everything; the development of antibiotics and medical understanding and treatment generally; and computers and pre-AI software creating the information age. As we move into the AI world, we face significant challenges with respect to shaping our world. A significant part of that shaping will be determined by how we collectively choose to reward and regulate AI implementations.3 And a part of that shaping will depend upon how we address intellectual property issues connected to artificial intelligence applications. This chapter sketches some of the concerns and suggests a path forward that directly responds to the challenge posed by Buckminster Fuller in this chapter’s framing epigraph.

While statutory provisions regarding domestic implementation of international law often remain vague, court practice reveals the actual significance of international law within a domestic legal system. Courts in China in principle refrain from applying international treaties directly if there is no specific enabling legislation that commands them to apply such norms. However, this chapter makes use of open access court decision databases to investigate the interpretation and application of international law by Chinese courts. It analyzes a number of treaties from various areas of international law to answer questions such as: What kind of international treaties are applied by courts? Do judges give primacy to national law or to international law in case of conflicting provisions? What standards of interpretation do judges apply when interpreting international treaties? Do Chinese judges selectively adapt international norms or engage in international norm-making?

In the past decade, the international community has generally felt China’s proactive role in the international human rights discourse. China has made substantive contributions in the creation of international human rights law and continues to promote a global moral consensus view of human rights. Additionally, China regularly and positively interacts with international human rights mechanisms such as the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and special procedures and treaty bodies. It practises the principles of respect, dialogue and cooperation rather than confrontation, while resisting politicization, selectivity and double standards. Since China emphasizes economic, social and cultural rights, there is an impression that it ignores civil and political rights or selectively safeguards human rights. This conclusion is difficult to support when we review the recent movements within Chinese policy and judicature when it comes to human rights. Considering its positive commitment to civil and political rights during the third UPR and in its fourth National Human Rights Action Plan, China is expected to make substantive progress in the comprehensive, balanced protection of all human rights.

There is a growing literature on the relationship between gender and intellectual property (IP). This chapter contributes to the literature by exploring gender and IP in relation to human development. The existing literature mapping the relationships between IP and gender has identified some of the ways that women have been disadvantaged by the IP system and I recognize the importance of these contributions. In this chapter, however, I seek to explore how IP laws, and trademarks in particular, can be used to promote human development for women, in fulfillment of the mandates of IP social justice (IP-SJ). This chapter focuses on trademarks because they are essential to businesses, large and small, that seek to develop and maintain their brands.