We have engaged our PRC IP Counsel and U.S. IP Counsel to carry out freedom-to-operate (FTO) analyses with respect to our Core Products.
Business · p. 212
Based on the FTO analyses, we were not aware of any issued patents that may affect our rights to conduct research and development or commercialization of our Core Products in China and the United States as of the Latest Practicable Date.
Business · p. 212
Directors are of the view that we have maintained sufficient intellectual property protection for our Core Products and product candidates, as well as their associated technologies, and had not infringed any third-party intellectual property rights during the Track Record Period and up to the Latest Practicable Date.
Based on the freedom-to-operate (“FTO”) analysis, as of August 18, 2026, there is no substantial risk of infringement of valid and enforceable issued patents of any third party in the Chinese mainland, Europe and the U.S. that may impact the development and commercialization of our Core Product in the Chinese mainland, Europe and the U.S.
During the Track Record Period and up to the Latest Practicable Date, except for one pending lawsuit claiming our infringement of a third-party’s utility patent, which we believe is not material and the likelihood of the plaintiff proving infringement or securing any meaningful compensation against us as very low, we had not been involved in any proceedings in respect of, and we had not received notice of any claims alleging infringement of, any intellectual property rights, whether as claimant or a respondent, nor were we aware of any breach of the aforementioned confidentiality or non-compete obligations by the counterparties.
In August 2020, Shanghai Nonferrous Network Information Technology Co., Ltd.* (上海有色網信息科技股份有限公司) (“Shanghai Nonferrous Network”) (as plaintiff), a PRC company with a registered capital of RMB12 million as at the Latest Practicable Date who is a comprehensive service provider in the non-ferrous metals industry, offering benchmark prices, analysis, information, and other services in the metals and mining sector, filed an alleged unfair competition and trademark infringement claim against our Company and our Shanghai branch.
Business · p. 167
However, taking into account that (1) as a commodity information service provider, we attach great importance to a healthy competitive relationship with companies in the same industry; (2) to avoid the possible prolonged court procedures; and (3) to reduce media attention, we opted for and undergone a mediation with the plaintiff under the direction of a judge on 20 May 2022 and have reached a settlement arrangement with the plaintiff at a settlement amount of approximately RMB4.0 million (the “Settlement Arrangement”).
The Plaintiff alleges that certain of our products marketed, imported, offered for sale, and sold in the U.S. market, for which we hold an authorized design patent, infringe a design patent owned by the Plaintiff (the “Asserted Patent”).
Risk Factors · p. 49
In 2026, the USPTO granted our request and instituted the ex parte reexamination proceeding with respect to the Asserted Patent.
Risk Factors · p. 49
As of the Latest Practicable Date, the litigation remained stayed.
For example, we are currently involved in over 40 pending lawsuits that have been brought against us concerning alleged intellectual property rights infringement.
Risk Factors · p. 88
As of 31 March 2026, we had made provisions in the amount of approximately US$6.0 million for the over 40 pending IP lawsuits described above in accordance with IFRS.
In addition, we are involved in IP infringement lawsuits against Temu and their competition counterclaim against us in the UK.
Business · p. 207
In August 2026, the court issued a first-instance judgment, finding that whilst we owned the copyright in the vast majority of certain photographs used on Temu in 2023 and 2024, such use did not amount to copyright infringement under UK law at the time due to narrow technical reasons with respect to those specific photographs.