Legal Risk Management in Intellectual Property-Supported Financing: The Role of Court Decisions in the Construction of Secured Transaction Rules

Authors

  • Ziqian Shao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/vtyv6b18

Keywords:

Intellectual Property Financing, Secured Transactions, Legal Risks, Judicial Decisions, Registry System

Abstract

Against the backdrop of the rise of technology-intensive industries and the increasingly significant trend of asset-lightening of enterprises, the financing function of intellectual property as an encumbered asset has attracted great attention. Intangible assets, such as patents, trademarks and copyrights, are gradually entering the field of traditional secured transactions. However, in secured practice, problems such as unclear ownership, fluctuating valuation, enforcement difficulties and lack of harmonization of cross-border regimes frequently occur, constituting the core of the legal risks of intellectual property financing. At the same time, the court's function of interpreting the system and guiding the path in its decisions has become more and more prominent, and has become an important source of rule growth. This article analyzes the representative jurisprudence of China, the United States and the United Kingdom, discusses how the court responds to the key issues of the certainty of the collateral, the effectiveness of the registration and the enforcement path, and summarizes a number of directions for the construction of the system from the logic of the judiciary, and then puts forward the proposal of the path of risk management. The paper argues that the courts have gradually become the actual shapers of the security system at the stage when the rules are not yet clear, and their decisions not only adjudicate individual cases, but also implicitly have a guiding effect on the behavior of future transactions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Chen, L. (2020). On the legal risk prevention and control mechanism of intellectual property pledge financing. Legal Science: Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law, (6), 88–95.

[2] Song, H., & Liu, A. (2022). Study on the selection of intellectual property securitization models and policy paths: Based on multiple case comparison. Journal of Intelligence, 41(4), 112–121.

[3] Afaq, A., & Chhaya, R. (2022). Securitization of intellectual property: Legal recourse in India. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 27(1), 15–26.

[4] Owens-Richards, M. (2017). The collateralization and securitisation of intellectual property. Queen Mary University of London.

[5] Su, L., & Lei, S. (2024). Intellectual property securitisation risk analysis, legal regulation, and management strategies: From Chinese perspective. Business & Economics, 23(1), 113–129.

[6] Nemlioglu, I. (2019). A novelty on unlocking businesses' potential growth: Intellectual property securitisation. Procedia Computer Science, 164, 248–255.

[7] Solomon, D., & Bitton, M. (2020). Intellectual property securitization. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 33(1), 91–128.

[8] Guseva, Y. (2021). Secured Transactions and Intellectual Property: Comparative Perspectives and Reform Proposals. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, 44(3), 445–487.

[9] Shen, G. (2023). Judicial logic and system supply of intellectual property financing. Intellectual Property Review, (4), 56–64.

[10] Zhang, W. (2023). Judicial Practice and Challenges in IP-Backed Financing in China: A Case Study Perspective. Modern Law Science, 45(2), 109–121.

Downloads

Published

29-08-2025

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Shao, Z. (2025). Legal Risk Management in Intellectual Property-Supported Financing: The Role of Court Decisions in the Construction of Secured Transaction Rules. Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 12(2), 51-55. https://doi.org/10.54097/vtyv6b18