The era when flooring the accelerator was enough to stay ahead is over. What matters now is who can hold a steady pace through the turbulence. Tian Bo, head of IP at Geely Holding Group, and Wendy Wei, senior manager, examine corporate IP management in the age of AI
When AI starts churning out patent disclosure documents by the dozen, when companies are at once pushing for internal efficiency and absorbing the skills gap left by rapid technological turnover, and when Chinese car makers take to global racetracks with IP risk never far behind – are the corporate IP departments ready for the stiffer challenge?
In 2025, China’s IP sector passed RMB1.2 trillion (USD295 billion) in market value, up 28.3% year on year. Its Patent Co-operation Treaty (PCT) international filings remained the world’s largest. Companies listed on Shanghai’s Star market held an average of 128 core patents, and their conversion rate jumped from 18% to 25%. These figures do not describe mere growth but a systemic reconstruction: IP work is shifting from cost centre to strategic asset.
With 2026 under full sail – new AI patent examination rules in force, quantum computing and large models commercialising fast, and Chinese firms pushing deeper into overseas markets – IP is no longer a pile of legal documents and application forms. It has become a strategic resource that can decide a company’s fate and reshape an industry.
Against this backdrop, the authors put forward a central proposition: what changes in corporate IP work are the forms, the tools and the settings; what does not change is its nature as a mechanism for rewarding innovation and an engine of commercial value. Only by distinguishing the two can legal teams set sensible priorities when resources are scarce.
Four changes: a structural leap
The pressures now bearing on IP work do not stem from upgraded tools or adjusted rules as such. They stem from an external environment that demands something different of the function.
Faster technological turnover makes static rights portfolios inadequate against dynamic competitive risk. Heightened geopolitical rivalry extends the value of patents beyond legal protection into standard setting and supply chain security. The arrival of AI tools redraws the boundary between human and machine in searching, monitoring and judging. These pressures compound, and the way companies do IP work must adapt.
(1) The object of protection: from securing rights case by case to laying out the board. Yesterday, companies filed patents to obtain certificates. Today, they file to choke off rivals. From January 2026, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) brought new examination rules for AI and big data patents into effect, admitting “ethical review” into the technical examination system for the first time: AI technology must comply with the law, public order and the public interest.
At the same time, frontier fields such as quantum computing, 6G and synthetic biology are converging and iterating across boundaries, so that no single technology can any longer serve as a moat. Car makers must build an ecosystem spanning vehicle, road, cloud and network if they are to seize the power to shape the rules of future industries. IP is vaulting from a tool of technical protection to a strategic resource in the contest for global rule making authority.
(2) The mode of protection: from human driven to intelligent co-ordination. AI-assisted searching, automated infringement monitoring and patent valuation models are already widespread. The real change lies in the emergence of “systematic governance” as a mindset.
The CNIPA’s principle of “fast where speed is warranted, slow where it is not, combining the two, and adapting to demand” means that examination of patents in priority industries and core technologies will be precisely accelerated, a sign of state resources being marshalled behind strategic innovation.
Within companies, IP management must likewise co-ordinate R&D, marketing, legal and finance to build a closed loop: freedom-to-operate (FTO) analysis embedded at the front end, dynamic optimisation of the patent portfolio in the middle, and risk warning and response at the back. IP management is no longer the IP department going it alone, but the whole organisation mounting a co-ordinated campaign.
(3) The utilisation model: from defensive cost to profit centre. Traditionally, patents were a matter of spending (application fees, annuities and litigation costs) – a textbook cost centre. But market transactions of the past two years offer a new reference point. In 2026, more companies treat IP as a profit centre, earning substantial returns through licensing, using patent portfolios as capital contributions, and treating them as core assets in merger valuations.
(4) The talent profile: from single discipline expert to all round operator. The complexity of technology and the diversity of commercial settings impose new demands. Tomorrow’s IP professional must be a “T-shaped” talent: deep vertically in various laws and technical principles, broad horizontally in business logic, financial models and market strategy. Language skills, overseas experience and an understanding of international rules are the hard currency of cross-border IP work.
Four constants: holding the line
Technology changes, rules change, but the underlying logic of corporate IP work does not.
(1) Institutional function: adding the fuel of interest to the fire of genius. The IP regime remains the basic guarantee of society-wide innovative vitality and of the lawful rights of innovators. It is the underlying contract of a market economy and the strongest positive feedback the law gives to innovation.
(2) Professional core: depth and breadth together. Intelligent tools improve the efficiency of information gathering, but judgement at critical points – construing the scope of claim protection, comparing prior art and assessing infringement risk – still depends on professional experience and legal reasoning. As technology grows more complex, the demands for deep technical understanding, precise legal application and sharp commercial judgment will only rise.
(3) Value orientation: service to commercial ends. IP is not an end in itself. Whether used to exclude competitors, to earn licensing revenue, or as a basis for valuation in financing and M&A, it must ultimately serve the fundamental goals of supporting corporate strategy, strengthening competitive advantage and creating commercial value.
(4) Internationalisation: a global view is the only way out. IP is inherently a global affair. As Chinese companies accelerate their going out, a global outlook, an understanding of international rules, and the capacity for cross-border IP portfolio management and operation are the key variables determining whether overseas business lands smoothly.
Three recommendations
Change identifies where the pressure lies; constancy marks where the boundaries are. The real question is what legal teams should do first, what later, and what can wait, given limited resources and time.
(1) Streamlined process plus global compliance. Legal teams should optimise internal processes, balancing cost control against quality; build compliance mechanisms adapted to regulators in different jurisdictions; advance standardisation of IP management; establish a global filing, maintenance and risk prevention system; and manage cross-border data flows and trade secret protection.
(2) Proactive risk plus integrated defence. Legal teams should move from reacting to litigation to identifying, assessing and resolving IP risk across the chain: embed FTO analysis at the R&D and launch stage; build competitor monitoring and early warning mechanisms, grading identified risks by probability of infringement and severity of harm; and build a portfolio that combines offence and defence, balancing the coverage of offensive claims against the stability of defensive ones.
(3) Professional talent plus embedded culture. Legal teams should: cultivate IP talent fluent in technology, law and business; embed IP awareness in corporate culture; train staff at all levels; and build effective inventor incentives so that IP creation becomes second nature.
Amid change, remain a creator of value
In 2026, corporate IP work stands at a historical crossroads. AI has reshaped examination efficiency, data has widened the territory of protection, but the legal vocation – to protect creation and to spur progress – has not changed. For companies that mean to ride out cycles, the moment to redefine IP has arrived. The key question is no longer “what are we protecting?”, but “what kind of future are we creating?”.
That is what will decide who leads the next decade and who follows.
