The "Anti-Monopoly Law of the PRC "was officially passed by the National People's Congress Standing Committee on August 30, 2007 and carried out on August 1, 2008. The Law has 57 clauses, mainly concerning monopoly behaviors on exclusion or confinement of competition or any influence resulted thereof, such as monopoly agreement, market ascendancy abuse and operator concentration.

It is noteworthy that Clause 55 of the Anti-Monopoly Law includes intellectual property abuse and competition exclusion or confinement into its scope of application. This Clause after publicized immediately arouses attentions as well as many doubts and guesses from intellectual property obligees both at home and abroad. This article will discuss relevant possible influences of the Anti-Monopoly Law on intellectual properties in comparison method.

Clause 55 of Anti-Monopoly Law of the PRC states that "the law is not applied if the operator uses intellectual properties in accordance with relevant laws and administrative regulations; however, if the operator abuses intellectual properties and exclude or confine competitions, the law shall be applied". Although Clause 55 is short and brief in expression, it concerns three basic but very important legal problems, namely, relation between intellectual property law and the Anti-Monopoly Law, conditions of "intellectual property abuse" and definitions of "competition exclusion and confinement".

I. Relation between Intellectual Property Law and Anti-Monopoly Law
The first sentence of clause 55 of the Anti-Monopoly Law defines the principle relations between intellectual property law and the Anti-Monopoly Law, namely, "the law is not applied if the operator uses intellectual properties in accordance with relevant laws and administrative regulations."

The aforesaid clause acknowledges the opposition between the Anti-Monopoly Law and the Intellectual Property Law. However, if the obligee uses its intellectual properties in accordance with relevant laws, the two law systems may supplement each other. Essentially, the intellectual property is an exclusive right to a certain degree and confined by time to help inventor to protect his inventions and prevent epigone from imitation or other unfair use. Therefore, the final goal of intellectual property protection is to encourage innovations. On the other hand, the aim of the Anti-Monopoly Law is to prohibit monopoly and competition confinement. In the future view, the punishment on such exclusive behavior may help market participation of all competitors and protect innovations. On the aspect of product purchase and selling, the Anti-Monopoly Law may regulate the behaviors of obligee and make him fairly and rationally use his rights, which thereby makes beneficial supplement to the intellectual property system. Furthermore, both the Anti-Monopoly Law and the Intellectual Property Law are to improve efficiency, encourage product quality improvement and reduce product price.