非遗的知识产权，国家正在补哪几块短板

▍规划里的几句话，指向哪里

文件在「加强规范管理」部分提出：完善中国非遗标识使用管理制度；加强跨部门协作，整治虚假宣传、过度商业化等问题，依法查处违法违规案件；完善非遗信息查询方式，协同推进互联网平台涉非遗信息审核；运用现有知识产权工具，加强知识产权保护协同工作机制建设；支持探索开展非遗领域公益诉讼，保障传承人和相关群体的合法权益。

非遗领域知识产权，指的是围绕非遗项目、传承人及其衍生表达所产生的著作权、商标权、地理标志与反不正当竞争等一揽子权利；《非物质文化遗产保护传承「十五五」规划》（文化和旅游部，2026 年 9 月印发）提出：运用现有知识产权工具，加强协同工作机制建设。

▍为什么难：非遗的权利主体，天生是「一群人」

非遗在知识产权上难办，根源不在法律不够，而在它的性质与传统知识产权制度的假设对不上。著作权保护的是有明确作者、有独创表达、有保护期限的作品；而一门技艺往往是一个群体在几代人里磨出来的，找不到单一作者，也说不清从哪天起算。

专利要的是新颖性，而传统技艺往往早就公开；商标与地理标志能用，但需要明确的权利主体与持续的商业使用，一个人守着一门手艺的村子未必有精力去注册和维权。于是出现了空档：图案、纹样、名称被大量使用，真正做它的人却不在受益名单里。

▍从「另立新法」到「把现有工具组合起来」

值得注意的是文件用的措辞——「运用现有知识产权工具」。这不是要另立一部非遗知识产权法，而是把著作权、商标、地理标志、反不正当竞争这些已有工具，配上跨部门的信息共享与协同机制一起用。对具体的手艺项目，可组合的方式大致有三类：作品与图案走著作权登记，产地与品类走地理标志或证明商标，被冒用后走反不正当竞争与侵权诉讼。

「支持探索开展非遗领域公益诉讼」这一句的分量也在同一处：单个手艺人打一场维权官司，成本与精力往往撑不住；公益诉讼提供的是一条不依赖个体的路径，让行业协会、检察机关等主体可以替一个群体出面。

▍落点：手艺人与出海企业该关心什么

对做手艺的人，可做的是把「来源」变成可核验的材料：工序记录、作者署名、产地证明，越早越好。对做非遗出海的企业，这一条更实际——欧美与日韩市场对文化产品的来源与工艺说明本就问得细，国内把来源做扎实，出去时就是现成的通行证。文件提出加强协同机制建设，指向的正是这样一条从国内到境外的连续性。

▍问答

问 ｜ 非遗有没有专门的知识产权保护法？

答 ｜ 目前没有单独立法，走的是「现有工具组合」的路子：著作权、商标、地理标志、反不正当竞争各有适用条件，一个项目往往要组合使用。《非物质文化遗产保护传承「十五五」规划》（文化和旅游部，2026 年 9 月印发）提出「运用现有知识产权工具」、加强协同工作机制建设；依据《中华人民共和国非物质文化遗产法》，使用非遗涉及知识产权的，适用有关法律、行政法规的规定。

问 ｜ 手艺人发现自己的作品被冒用，头一步该做什么？

答 ｜ 先固定证据，再谈维权。把被冒用的页面、商品、宣传语截图存证，同时整理能证明来源的材料——工序记录、署名、产地、发布时间。材料齐了，才能判断走平台投诉、行政举报还是诉讼；材料不齐，哪种路径都难起步。

问 ｜ 韵和鸣的器物出自谁的手？怎么查来源？

答 ｜ 每一件都能查到人。它只与传承人本人合作，器物由老师手工完成并共同署名，来源可以一路回溯到具体的工坊与产地。对做跨境业务的人来说，这条链不只是信任问题——海外买家问工艺来源时，它就是能拿出来的凭据。

📩 非遗项目 ｜ 匠人举荐 ｜ 跨境出海 ｜ 线下联营

欢迎留言或后台联系，我们与匠人同行。

—— 韵和鸣 · 与匠人同行

〖 国 〗

相关搜索 ｜ RELATED SEARCHES

非遗 知识产权 保护 · 非物质文化遗产保护传承十五五规划 · 非遗 公益诉讼 · 非遗标识 使用管理

English

In the section on strengthening standards and management, the document proposes improving the system for the use and administration of China's heritage identifier; strengthening cross-departmental coordination to address false advertising and excessive commercialization, and investigating and penalizing violations according to law; improving ways to query heritage information and coordinating the review of heritage-related content on internet platforms; using existing intellectual property tools to build a coordinated mechanism for protection; and supporting exploration of public interest litigation in the heritage field to safeguard the lawful rights of bearers and related groups.

Intellectual property in the heritage field refers to the bundle of rights surrounding heritage projects, their bearers and derivative expressions—copyright, trademarks, geographical indications and anti-unfair-competition protection. The Plan for the Protection and Transmission of Intangible Cultural Heritage for the 15th Five-Year Period (Ministry of Culture and Tourism, issued September 2026) proposes using existing intellectual property tools and building a coordinated mechanism for protection.

Why It Is Hard: The Rights Holder Is Naturally a Group

The difficulty of heritage in intellectual property lies not in insufficient law but in a mismatch of nature: copyright protects works with a clear author, original expression and a limited term, while a craft is usually shaped by a group over several generations, with no single author and no date to start counting from.

Patents require novelty, yet traditional techniques are usually long public; trademarks and geographical indications work, but require a clear rights holder and continuous commercial use, and a village where one person keeps a craft alive may have neither the energy to register nor to enforce. A gap opens: patterns, motifs and names are used widely, while the people who make them are not on the list of beneficiaries.

From "A New Law" to "Combining the Tools at Hand"

The wording is worth noting—"using existing intellectual property tools." This is not a plan to build a separate heritage IP law from scratch but to combine copyright, trademarks, geographical indications and anti-unfair-competition rules with cross-departmental information sharing and coordination. For a given craft, roughly three combinations exist: copyright registration for works and patterns; geographical indications or certification marks for origin and category; anti-unfair-competition and infringement actions once misuse occurs.

The line on "exploring public interest litigation" carries weight for the same reason: a single artisan often cannot bear the cost or the energy of a lawsuit, and public interest litigation offers a route that does not depend on one individual, allowing industry associations, procuratorates and similar bodies to act for a group.

What Bearers and Exporting Firms Should Watch

For makers, the practical step is to turn "origin" into verifiable material: records of the process, the maker's signature, proof of place—the earlier the better. For firms exporting heritage goods, this matters even more: buyers in Europe, North America, Japan and Korea already ask in detail about the source and the craft, so building the record at home becomes a ready passport abroad. The document's call to build a coordinated mechanism for heritage IP protection points precisely at such continuity from home to overseas.

Is there a dedicated intellectual property law for intangible cultural heritage?

There is no separate statute; the route is a combination of existing tools. Copyright, trademarks, geographical indications and anti-unfair-competition rules each have their own conditions, and one project often needs several together. The Plan for the Protection and Transmission of Intangible Cultural Heritage for the 15th Five-Year Period (Ministry of Culture and Tourism, issued September 2026) proposes "using existing intellectual property tools" and building a coordinated protection mechanism; under the Intangible Cultural Heritage Law of the People's Republic of China, where use of heritage involves intellectual property, the relevant laws and administrative regulations apply.

What is the first step when a maker finds work misused?

Secure the evidence first, then talk about enforcement. Screenshot and preserve the pages, products and promotional language that misuse the work, and assemble your own proof of origin—process records, signature, place, publication dates. With the material complete you can judge whether to file a platform complaint, an administrative report or a lawsuit; without it, none of the routes gets far.

Whose hands do YUNHEMING's pieces come from, and how is the source checked?

Every piece can be traced to a person. It works only with the bearers themselves; the pieces are finished by hand and co-signed, and provenance can be followed back to a specific workshop and place. For anyone in cross-border trade this chain is not merely a matter of trust—when overseas buyers ask where the craft came from, it is the evidence that can be produced.

The above is a personal reading; the official text is authoritative.

ICH Projects · Artisan Referrals · Global Distribution · Salon Partnerships