The Interface of EC Competition Law and Intellectual Property Rights: the Essential and the Creative

2005 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 189-210
Author(s):  
Imelda Maher

This article uses the issue of compulsory licensing of copyright to explore the relationship between intellectual property law (specifically copyright law) and competition law in the EU. It takes as its starting position the proposition that competition law is the ultimate restraint on the monopoly potential of intellectual property with intellectual property rights (IPR) located in competition law. However, it argues that it is too simplistic to cast the approach of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the IMS case purely as one of competition law being allowed to trump copyright. Instead, it sees the judgment as an example of doctrinal compromise for both legal subsystems with competition law placing limits on the invocation of copyright as the basis for a refusal to deal, while suggesting a remedy in the form of compulsory licensing which runs contrary to its conceptual roots in private law and notions of freedom of contract.

2005 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 189-210
Author(s):  
Imelda Maher

This article uses the issue of compulsory licensing of copyright to explore the relationship between intellectual property law (specifically copyright law) and competition law in the EU. It takes as its starting position the proposition that competition law is the ultimate restraint on the monopoly potential of intellectual property with intellectual property rights (IPR) located in competition law. However, it argues that it is too simplistic to cast the approach of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the IMS case purely as one of competition law being allowed to trump copyright. Instead, it sees the judgment as an example of doctrinal compromise for both legal subsystems with competition law placing limits on the invocation of copyright as the basis for a refusal to deal, while suggesting a remedy in the form of compulsory licensing which runs contrary to its conceptual roots in private law and notions of freedom of contract.


2006 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 153-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannis Lianos

The intersection between competition law and intellectual property has been a contentious issue since the very beginnings of European Communities (EC) competition law. Both intellectual property and competition law pursue the aim of enhancing economic welfare and innovation, but their direct objectives seem to be in conflict. Whereas intellectual property focuses on the reward of inventive effort and the inventor’s incentives to innovate by conferring an exclusive right on the use of the invention, competition law emphasises the dissemination of innovation by ensuring diffusion and access.


2021 ◽  
pp. 807-851
Author(s):  
Richard Whish ◽  
David Bailey

This chapter considers the relationship between intellectual property rights and competition law. After a brief introduction, it deals in general terms with the application of Article 101 to licences of intellectual property rights. The chapter proceeds to discuss the provisions of Regulation 316/2014, the block exemption for technology transfer agreements. It also considers the application of Article 101 to various other agreements concerning intellectual property rights such as technology pools and settlements of litigation. This is followed by a section on the application of Article 102 to the way in which dominant undertakings exercise their intellectual property rights, including an examination of the controversial subject of refusals to license intellectual property rights which are sometimes found to be abusive. The chapter concludes with a look at the position in UK competition law.


Author(s):  
Sandra Marco Colino

This chapter discusses the relationship between competition law and intellectual property rights. Competition law may limit the ability to exercise intellectual property rights. Article 101 TFEU and Chapter I Prohibition may apply to agreements to license intellectual property, as well as pay-for-delay settlements between a patent holder and potential competitors. Article 102 TFEU and Chapter II Prohibition may apply to the use of intellectual property rights by a dominant undertaking, particularly when the protected asset is essential to third parties. The existence of intellectual property rights does not automatically confer a dominant position — the product or service may still face competition.


Author(s):  
Richard Whish ◽  
David Bailey

This chapter considers the relationship between intellectual property rights and competition law. After a brief introduction, it deals in general terms with the application of Article 101 to licences of intellectual property rights. The chapter proceeds to discuss the provisions of Regulation 316/2014, the block exemption for technology transfer agreements. It also considers the application of Article 101 to various other agreements concerning intellectual property rights such as technology pools and settlements of litigation. This is followed by a section on the application of Article 102 to the way in which dominant undertakings exercise their intellectual property rights, including an examination of the controversial subject of refusals to license intellectual property rights which are sometimes found to be abusive. The chapter concludes with a look at the position in UK competition law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document