Index Firm introduction Service contents Fora Q & A & Opinion Acts and Newsletters Contact us Relevant links

Index • Firm introduction • Basic introduction






Deep & Far was founded in 1992 and is one of the largest law firms in this country.  The firm is presently focussed on the practice in separate or in combination of all aspects of intellectual property rights (IPRs) including patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, unfair competition, and/or licensing, counseling, litigation and/or transaction thereof.  Since this firm edges itself into the IPRs field, the firm quickly comes to fame.  As an illustration, this firm often is one of the largest sources from which foreign filing orders originate. 

The fascinating rise of this firm begins from the founder of Deep & Far attorneys-at-law, C. F. Tsai, who is the first patent practitioner in this country who both has technological and law backgrounds and is qualified as a local attorney-at-law.  The patent attorneys and patent engineers in this firm normally hold outstanding and advanced degrees and are generally graduated from the top five universities in this country and/or the university in the US.  Our prominent staffs are dedicated to provide the best quality service in IPRs.  As a proof, about one half of top 100 incorporations in this country have experiences of seeking patented their techniques, but more than one fifth of the top 100 incorporations are/were clients of this firm.  Furthermore, Hi-Tech companies in the science-based industrial park located at Hsin Chu play an important role in booming the economy of this country.  About one half of which have experiences in seeking patented their techniques, and out of more than 60% of the patent-experienced companies in that park have ever entrusted their IPR works to this firm. 

We have experienced in seeking IPR-protections for our clients in more than 100 territories all over the world.  We have thousands of IPR-cases respectively prosecuted before official Patent Offices of major industrialized countries.  This firm not only is the most competent in IPR-related matters in this country but also is very familiar with IPR-practices in major industrialized countries.  As a matter of fact, this firm oftentimes tries and makes precedents of new claim-drafting styles.  While we might have become wonderfully famed locally with remarkable appreciation and respects, we would like to extend our services for internationalized or quality service-requiring foreign conglomerated giants, corporations or individuals.  We strongly believe that we will win more applause from clients all over the world.



Our Names

Sometimes, we were questioned “how does your name, Deep & Far come out or why do you use Deep & Far as your firm name?”  It is the standard answer of Mr. C. F. Tsai to this question “because I want my firm to be deeply rooted in Taiwan first and then far all over the world.”  As a matter of fact, according to Mr. Tsai, the firm’s English and Chinese names (hereinafter referred to as Names) are interlinkedly hatched.  He wants Names similarly pronounced, and respectively meaningful and indicative of aims and goals at which this firm is established to take and make.  The Chinese one reads 道法.  The first word,, pronounced as Tao is the identical word to that founded by Lao-tzu in the 6th century B.C. and means the fundamental principle that orders the universe, by which it is derived to mean morality, rationality and reason when it acts as a noun.  When acts as a verb, it can be referred to “guide” or “talk, speak or address.”  The second word,, pronounced as Far means “law.”  Accordingly, in Chinese version, 道法, the name of this firm could have the following meanings:

1)  Guiding the laws;

2)  Talking about the laws; and

3)  Rationally practicing the laws.

It is our belief that a firm can be deep and/or far only if it can provide quality-competent and fee-competitive service, bravely persevere in cultivating its prime goal and ideal and/or provide services, which other firms cannot provide.  We only do what and only perform works which enable us to be Deep and Far.



Technical Introduction

Deep & Far attorneys-at-law provides full phases of legal services but is presently focused on the practice in separate or in combination of all aspects of intellectual property rights (IPRs) including patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, unfair competition, and/or licensing, counseling, litigation and/or transaction thereof.

This firm is renowned to provide the best quality service in IPRs in this country.  It is our philosophy to provide the most competent legal services in Taiwan and Mainland China.  The necessitated ensuing question is how we can so provide.  Deep & Far so achieves by selecting, edifying and nurturing persons who have the following personalities: learned in expertise, morally earnest and sincerely behaved in mind and strictly disciplined between give and take. 

By the perseverance that we only do what and only perform works which enable this firm to be deep and far, Deep and Far can then equate the reality with its name.  It is such perseverance that enables on the one hand that we lead our unique way, but that limits our size somehow on the other hand in that peoples of above-mentioned personalities are not very many and not necessitated to be naturally or automatically created only for Deep & Far.

It will thus sound no strange that some famous IPR-related disputes in this country necessitated participation by Deep & Far.  A more informative introduction to Deep & Far can be found in its web site above described.

This law firm is now primarily specialized in all aspects of intellectual property rights including patents, trademarks, copyrights, unfair competition, trade secrets, IPR-counsel, licensing, IPR-transaction and IPR-litigation all of which are respectively summarized as follows.




We have the most sincere peoples to provide the most competent services in IPRs in this country.  A reasonable one should question why we are able to assert that we can provide better or the best services in IPRs in this country.  The answer will be that in addition to our excellent personnel qualifications, we have been able to discern the regularities and irregularities of prosecuting IPRs in this country.  As an example, so far as the operation of the Patent Office (which is now Intellectual Property Office (IPO) under the Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA)) is concerned, it appears IPO has not skillfully yet fully operated the search system although it is believed that the situation is getting improved.  This situation should be taken into consideration upon preparing the response and/or arguments against an Office Action.

It is thus more critical and important than other countries to pursue a notice of allowance before the Patent Office, i.e., IPO since its upper agency, MOEA or even the administrative court will have even poorer patent-related knowledge.   Accordingly, if unfortunately, an IPO-rejected application is transferred to their care, the application will be more dangerous than it is in the IPO.  Generally speaking, a technical argument detailing the technical features of an application and the achieved advantages thereof over the prior art might not be wonderful enough.  Passages explaining before the Examiner how and why an application is patentable from a patent-law viewpoint might be well helpful.

As one might experience or imagine, one of the most difficult arguments is to dissolve the Examiner’s allegation that the application is rejected as being ‘obvious’ with or without citing any reference.  As is well-known, an invention is always based on or developed from a brain wave or an inspiration.  It is very difficult, if not impossible, to judge whether the application is ‘obvious’ if the judgement is to be made from a relatively subjective viewpoint rather than a relatively objective viewpoint based upon the prior art to be taken by a hypothetical one skilled in the art having an average ingenuity.




The trademark practice here is more humanized than the patent practice but still has few measures deserved to be noticed.  Before these are corrected, they remain to be attracting one’s special care.  For example, a trademark application filed by a company must clearly show who its representative is.  Further, the Trademark Office exercises a mandatory classification and specification of the goods so that any newly developed goods need not be successfully put into the registered specification.  In addition, the registration fees can be paid in two installments within three years from registration of a trademark application.

The booming economics in this country partly originates from the fact that she provides a cheap but sound product.  The quality of the intangible IPR works, however, is uneasy to be examined.  Accordingly, low price competition is overwhelming here without maintenance of a quality service.  It takes some time and needs a little more facts for the clients to discern sincere and earnest Deep & Far might be the most competent firm to prosecute trademark matters on their behalves.





Before entering into WTO (World Trade Organization), the most unique aspect of copyright protection in this country is that this country is not a party to the Berne Convention so that Article 4 of ROC Copyright Law contains very important information to an alien.  That Article provides “a work of a foreigner in the following cases may be entitled to enjoy a copyright under this Law provided a treaty or agreement, resolved and passed by the Legislative Yuan, having otherwise provided shall govern:

1.   Where it is first published in the territory of the Republic of China, or in a place outside the territory of the Republic of China but published in the territory of the Republic of China within 30 days thereafter provided that it has been duly verified that a work of an ROC national is entitled to protection under the same circumstance in the home country of the foreigner.

2.   Where, according to treaty, agreement or laws, regulations or precedents in the home country, a work of an ROC nationals is entitled to enjoy a copyright in that country.

Accordingly, the prerequisite for an alien to enjoy copyright protection is he or she first or simultaneously publishes his or her work in the meaning of Article 3(4) of Berne Copyright Convention in this country. 

Although the above-mentioned practice plays no role in this country after entering into WTO, there still are some outstanding provisions, e.g. the parallel importation stipulated in Article 87 of ROC Copyright Law.  We are competent in providing a precise advice on copyright-related matters.



Unfair Competition

Since its promulgation on February 4, 1991, Unfair Competition Law has played an important role in changing or restructuring the competition-curbing psychology in this country.  As an example, in the past, an enterprise having a patent and suspecting infringed tends to bravely sue another incorporation in civil and/or criminal proceedings and/or technically leaks such messages to public media in an attempt to damage or influence the operation of the incorporation without caring about any kind of punishment to be imposed upon the enterprise. 

Since Unfair Competition Law came into force, the social competition or trade order has been improved.  If an entity finds there does exist an unfair competition, it often is an effective measure if we properly resort to this law.  Unfair Competition Law might be one of measures constructing an attacking and/or defending net.  This firm has lots of experiences involving in this law and is capable in providing competent services thereof.



Trade Secrets 

This country is a statutory one.  Accordingly, up to the promulgation of Trade Secret Law on January 17, 1996, it is impossible for an incorporation to claim damages against another company even if the company does act against equity or justice according to the provisions in the later passed Trade Secret Law.  The most famous case as regards the trade secret is Microtek International Inc. v. Umax Data System Inc., which, nevertheless, happened before the just mentioned promulgation date.

Since the trade secret is also an important aspect of the Intellectual Property Rights, how it is interrelated to other aspects of, how it can contribute to the strategies of and what role it should play in the network of IPRs of a particular entity should carefully be considered and advised.  There should be some measures a company should adopt in order to comply with provisions of this Law and to assistantly wing its IPR-projects for effectively protecting its interests.  We are experienced to structure a particular project most suitable for a particular company.




We are of the opinion that the survival rule in the bloody market is a competitive price for a competent service, but there is also a noble rule in the lovely market that there always is an opportunity for a competent service with a competitive price.  With these rules in mind, we serve as indispensable counsel for many clients to call their attention where the pitfall is before them and to provide truth-piercing opinions about how to treat and/or cope with a situation, a plan and/or a contract.  By which clients feel benefited very much, and as such, we are deeply relied and counted upon by them.  Therefore, this firm and its clients wonderfully edge their own ways into respective markets and find a mutual far way to pave their smooth ways in the future.

It is our belief only when one can always provide services or products which others cannot offer or can offer only at a later time, can he well survive the market at all times.  A client sharing the same philosophy often is this firm’s intimate client




In order to reap what one has sown to the largest extent, he needs not work and/or implement by himself his intellectual property rights.  In view of tendency, necessity and destiny of the rigorous bifurcation of works, an entity, even being an internationalized company, always can find its organization falling short of efficiently, effectively and punctually reaching a goal.  As such, licensing to and/or licensed from other(s) oftentimes are the most intelligent measures.

It deserves no surprise that the win-win strategy is getting more and more advocated since the opposite trading party would like to trade with the same one party again only when it finds benefited thereby.  Not only this firm will strike out provisions in an agreement doing against interests of the client, but also this firm advises how the client can get balanced its interests from the same agreement.  Most remarkably and spectacularly, we advise how both parties of an agreement can both be benefited thereby.




In Buddhistical theory, everything is nothing, which can otherwise be everything.  Interpreting differently, every image is a void while the void can be any specific image.  One might have a potential property or right at his hand without ability and/or chance of exploiting and/or merchandizing it, which thus is void and/or nothing.  A legal entity, even being a big incorporation, is not always endowed the reins on merchandizing, manufacturing and/or marketing a specific intellectual property right, the spirit behind which might be able to explain the popular strategic alliance phenomenon.  The most superior rule for transaction is to trade a thing of which one is rich with another’s another thing of which the one is desirous but the another is rich.

Drafting agreement, advising on a cooperating agreement, planning a joint venture project and consulted in a cross-license project are services we provide now and then.




As mentioned hereinbefore, Mr. C. F. Tsai of this firm is the first one patent practitioner in this country who both has technological and law backgrounds and is qualified as a local attorney-at-law.  It goes without saying that the most controversial and complicated IPR-cases should be handled by this firm.  The ROC Patent Application No. 54625 entitled “Non-Knifing Plastic Adhesive Tape”, filed on January 21, 1971 and expired on January 21, 1981 is the most famous case hardly unknown to any national here who even only habitually reads headlines of economic news.  Its administrative dispute ran from 1971 to 1990 and its judicial litigation involving at least NT$800,000,000 began from 1972 and still continues now.  This application is represented by and thus its fate is linked with this firm.

Nearly all judges here have no technological background so that they would like to refer the case to an appraiser for appraising whether or not there is an infringement.  If the appraisement made thereby is to be argued or attacked, it is important to express or interpret the merits thereof in the language the judge can understand.

Litigation is the last measure for resolving the dispute.  Even in a favorable situation, this firm would like to suggest the client to reach an amicable settlement in order to result in a win-win structure from which both parties could normally derive the ultimate interests.  If the other party tries to ride for a fall or fool the client with a cunning trick, this firm normally persuades the client to rigorously defeat the other party to the root.

Litigation has skills.  This firm does not like to use litigant skills to trap the opposite party in a normal case.  We often skillfully make it clear to the other party that it has no chance to succeed in and will inevitably lose the litigation in order to solve a litigation at an earlier stage with a rational opposite party who sometimes becomes then a business partner of the client.  In this way, we believe this firm rightly behaves itself in its perseverance and insistency for chasing its goals and becoming deep and far in passing.


Index | Firm introduction | Service contents | Fora | Q & A & Opinion | Acts and Newsletters | Contact us | Relevant links