scholarly journals THE EUROPEAN PATENT WITH UNITARY EFFECT – A UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION FOR A UNITARY MARKET?

Author(s):  
Katharina Kaesling
Author(s):  
Markus Kuczera

In actions brought under Article 32(1)(i), the Court may exercise any power entrusted on the European Patent Office in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012, including the rectification of the Register for unitary patent protection.


Author(s):  
Winfried Tilmann

The EPUE Reg is a ‘special agreement’ within the meaning of Art 142(1) EPC (Recital 6; → Introduction to this Commentary, mn 125–34). The participating Member States, as a ‘group of Contracting States’ to the EPC, may therefore ‘give additional tasks’ to the EPO (Art 143(1) EPC). Art 9(1) EPUE Reg sets out which tasks these are and provides that they are to be given to the EPO. They have been given to the EPO by the Rules relating to Unitary Patent Protection (RUPR) (→ Annex following mn 45).


Author(s):  
Justine Pila ◽  
Paul L.C. Torremans

This chapter introduces the European law of patents and related rights with a discussion of the nature of patents as limited-term monopoly rights granted in respect of new, inventive, and industrially applicable inventions and the routes to obtaining patent protection in Europe. It then considers the existing European patent system established by the European Patent Convention 1973/2000, including its basis in state-based conceptions of IP territoriality, and the challenges presented to that system by globalization and developing technology. And finally, it discusses the long-standing pursuit of a unitary patent and unified patent court for Europe, including the reasons for each, and the features of the proposed Unitary Patent Package of 2012/2013.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krista Rantasaari

The unitary patent system with the establishment of the Unified Patent Court will lead to unitary patent protection covering most European Union countries. Moreover, it will lead to litigation with the same geographical reach. One potential concern related to increasing litigation is the so-called ‘patent trolls’ (non-practicing entities) that purchase patents for the purpose of portfolio building or company financing. One of the key expressed justifications of the unitary patent system was to support small- and medium-sized enterprises by securing them easier and wider access to patents. The aim of this article is to examine procedural safeguards from the perspective of the start-up and growth companies. These safeguards protect start-up and growth companies when acting as defendants. As a corollary, they weaken the enforcement mechanisms from the perspective of the plaintiff. The safeguards addressed in this article are fee shifting, preliminary injunctions, and bifurcation. As the Unified Patent Court system is still evolving, the current state of European patent litigation in key jurisdiction countries (Germany, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands) is analysed. This article explores how these safeguards evolve in the unitary patent regime and their potential to reduce uncertainty for start-up and growth companies when acting as defendants.


Radca Prawny ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 191-217
Author(s):  
Tomasz Orfin

Problems related to selected issues of unitary patent protection Unitary patent protection is one of the key challenges for the European Union. The current initiatives, which – despite being just a short step away from full implementation due to legal and formal issues, such as the complex legal structure or non-legal claims concerning their negative impact on the economy and competitiveness of enterprises – still raise doubts and uncertainties. The aim of this article is to illustrate the problem of unitary patent protection on selected issues concerning the European patent with unitary effect and the Unified Patent Court. The obstacles that prevent the implementation of the Unified Patent Court are presented. Critical voices assessing the proposed model of unitary patent protection are also presented and discussed.


Author(s):  
Ian J. Lloyd

This chapter considers in general terms the nature and manner of operation of the patent system. Topics discussed include international patent protection systems (Patent Co-operation Treaty, European Patent Convention, the unitary patent, and intellectual property in the GATS and WTO); requirements for patentability (novelty, inventive step, capacity for industrial application); matters excluded from patent protection; patenting software; and the process of obtaining and enforcing a patent.


Author(s):  
Winfried Tilmann

A European patent granted with the same set of claims in respect of all the participating Member States shall benefit from unitary effect in the participating Member States provided that its unitary effect has been registered in the Register for unitary patent protection.


Author(s):  
Noam Shemtov

This chapter examines the scope of protection to which graphical user interfaces may be eligible under various intellectual property rights: namely, trade marks, unfair-competition laws, design rights, copyright, and patents. It first considers the extent of copyright protection over a software product’s ‘look-and-feel’ elements, with particular emphasis on graphical user interfaces protection under US and EU laws. It then discusses trade-mark, trade-dress, and unfair-competition protection for graphical user interfaces, along with intellectual property rights protection for design patents and registered designs. Finally, it describes the patent protection for graphical user interfaces in the United States and at the European Patent Office.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 249-267
Author(s):  
Miłosz Malaga ◽  
Anna Wilińska-Zelek

In this article we examine the notion of ‘harmonisation’ in its interplay with the application of provisions on the free movement of goods. Due to the introduction of the European unitary patent protection system, we are witnessing the first cases of adopting enhanced cooperation in the internal market. This fact raises new, systemic questions concerning the concept of ‘harmonisation’ in European Union law. Are only legal, substantive aspects covered by its definition or should the territorial range of a legal act be taken into account? If yes – to what extent? Since the adoption of enhanced cooperation covers the field of intellectual property rights, the above questions concern the relationship between exercising those rights on the one hand and the principle of free movement on the other. A closer look at this matter leads to the conclusion that the unitary patent might not provide the solution to one of the problems that created for. More generally, in this article we conclude that when defining the concept of ‘harmonisation’, one should take its territorial scope into account narrowly, so as not to infringe the principles of EU law.


Author(s):  
Winfried Tilmann

According to Art 3(1) EPUE Reg, an EP granted with the same set of claims in respect of all the participating Member States shall benefit from unitary effect in the participating Member States provided that its unitary effect has been registered in the Register for unitary patent protection. That means that the unitary effect of an EP arises on entry in the Register for unitary patent protection kept by the EPO (Art 2(d)).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document