CONTENT SYNDICATION
*ATOM* FEED:


 

CONTENT SYNDICATION
RSS 0.91 FEED:


 

BLOGROLL OPML:

BLOGROLL OPML FILE

 


Search in IPJUR.COM

 

[Powered by Google]

  

BLOG@IP::JUR

Patent Attorney Axel H Horns' Blog on Intellectual Property Law.

 

INTERNAL LINKDisclaimer & About This Website

 

 

INTERNAL LINK Visit the archives

 

Sunday, February 11, 2007

 

Rough Weather Ahead For EPLA.

There seems to be rough weather ahead for the EXTERNAL LINKEPLA. This treaty would, if ever enacted in its present Draft form, set up a court system for patent litigation cases which is legally independent from the system of institutions as provided by the EU. With orther words, the EU might lose influence in a certain sector of patent politics. While the European Commission reluctantly has moved towards supporting the EPLA, in the European Parliament there some scepticalness appears to prevail.

Anti-patent campaigners fighting against EPLA had, after having got some input from the EU Commission, already as early as July, 2006, INTERNAL LINKcontemplated that the EPLA might perhaps not be compatible with mandatory EU Law. By means of a EXTERNAL LINKresolution dated October 12, 2006, on future patent policy in Europe, the European Parliament requested its Legal Service to provide an interim opinion on EU-related aspects of the possible conclusion of the European Patent Litigation Agreement by the Member States in the light of overlaps between that agreement and the EXTERNAL LINKacquis communautaire and to clarify legislative competences in this field.

Yesterday, EXTERNAL LINKIPEG Blog has EXTERNAL LINKunearthed some preliminary version of the Opinion. And the result appears to be quite negative:
  • The Opinion stresses that the competence of Member States to enter into the envisaged EPLA may not be separated from the issue of the existence of a Community competence to conclude that agreement, which may limit or exclude Member States competence Where the Community's competence is exclusive, the Member States may not conclude such an agreement.
  • Member States may not undertake such commitments outside the Community fiamework; such action would in principle contravene their obligations under Article 10 EC, and in particular the requirement to abstain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of the Treaty.
  • Compliance with Article 98[1] of EPLA would prima facie constitute a breach of Article 292 EC Treaty.
  • It follows that the Community's competence is exclusive for the matters governed by EPLA and Member States therefore are not entitled on their own to conclude that Agreement.
Of course, this non-binding Interim Legal Opinion does not mean that the European Court of Justice would decide along the same lines of thinking. However, it looks as if this obstacle should be taken as a very serious one.

The real matter behind this quarrel over EPLA is twofold:
  • On a first level, EU institutions, in particular the European Parliament, fear to suffer a loss of political influence on further developments.
  • On a second level, critics of the patent system argue that the EPLA could be used to enforce patents on computer-implemented inventions as granted by the European Patent Office (EPO). To certain anti-patent campaigners, fighting the EPLA means fighting the enforcement of (certain) patents granted by the EPO.
Politicians acting on the EU level should not forget that there had been a very straightforward way to kill the EPLA: Namely, to establish a reasonably crafted EU Community Patent System along with a related well-balanced system for litigation and enforcement. However, the political class has failed to create such a Community Patent, in the first instance due to lack of readiness to compromise with regard to the question of the language regime. Furthermore, the ligigation system proposed for Community Patents did not win the support of major stakeholders.

What did Mr. McCreevy INTERNAL LINKrecently say? "The proposal for an EU-wide patent is stuck in the mud". Right is he.

Technorati Tags: EXTERNAL LINK

Labels: ,

INTERNAL LINK[Permalink]

 


 

EPLA does indeed seem stuck in the mud. However, it's not quite the end of an EU-wide patent. EPLA was, quite clearly, designed by the EPO to kill off the Community Patent, the main proposal for an EU-wide patents. EPLA itself is as un-EU as it's possible to get without leaving for another continent.

So the demise of EPLA (which like the villain in a B-rate horror movie is probably not dead but just gathering strength for one more attack) actually opens the door for a real EU patent system, which, finally, is what I'd like to see emerge.

As for EPLA and software patents, I think the heavy lobbying from SAP and Microsoft in favour of EPLA tells the story. It was, after all, SAP that first announced that EPLA meant the victory of EPO software patents over those pesky national courts.
 
 
INTERNAL LINKPost a Comment

INTERNAL LINK Visit the archives

 

INTERNAL LINK< ? law blogs # >

 

INTERNAL LINKTechnorati Profile

 

BLOGROLL

 


Please read the INTERNAL LINK Disclaimer & About This Website (Pflichtangaben gemäss TDG) section.

Feel free to contact PA Axel H Horns via e-mail INTERNAL LINK horns@ipjur.com. BEWARE: DO NOT SEND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION UNENCRYPTED VIA E-MAIL. USE OF ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. PA AXEL H HORNS IS PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR ENCRYPTED E-MAIL MESSAGES USING PGP OR PGP COMPATIBLE FORMATS. THE PGP PUBLIC KEY FOR PA AXEL H HORNS IS AVAILABLE INTERNAL LINK HERE. THE GnuPG PUBLIC KEY FOR PA AXEL H HORNS IS AVAILABLE INTERNAL LINK HERE.

INTERNAL LINK Dipl.-Phys. Axel H Horns is Patentanwalt (German Patent Attorney), European Patent Attorney as well as European Trade Mark Attorney. In particular, he is Member of:

Click here to visit the SCL Online web site

VPP

Click here to visit the FICPI web site

 

 

 


   


This page is powered by Blogger.