Enhancing The Patent System in Europe: Progress Achived So Far.
There is a new Document 8992/08 issued by Slovenian EU Presidency to Permanent Representatives Committee (Part 1) on May 08, 2008, concerning potential enhancemet the patent system in Europe. Some of the key points of that Document quoted below read as follows:
Considerable progress has been achieved on both the patent litigation system and the Community patent, thanks to the positive and constructive attitude shown by delegations throughout the discussions. While some delegations would prefer to keep progress on patent litigation separate from that on the Community patent, others are of the opinion that consensus should be reached on both areas simultaneously. Therefore it would seem that a future political agreement would be difficult to achieve in the absence of a "package" deal covering both the patent litigation system and the Community patent. Accordingly, the Presidency sought to advance work on both in parallel.
As regards the patent litigation system, while there appears to be broad agreement on the overall structure, there are also issues which need to be further discussed in more technical detail. These include, in particular, the composition of panels at first instance, the language of proceedings, the jurisdiction for counterclaims for invalidity, transitional arrangements, the modalities for granting the Court of Justice the power to review judgments handed down by the appeal instance, and the funding of the system. The essence of this progress is reflected in working document 9124/08.
In response to a request by the Presidency, the Council Legal Service presented orally to the Working Party on 8 April 2008 its preliminary views on the type of legal instrument suitable for creating the envisaged patent litigation system. It was noted that for an international agreement to be concluded by the Community and the Member States (as well as third countries) it would be advisable to request the opinion of the Court of Justice.
As regards the Community patent, discussions focused on the two main outstanding issues, i.e. translation arrangements and the distribution of revenue from renewal fees. It is felt that an agreement on these two issues would considerably facilitate an overall agreement on the Community patent Regulation. There was broad agreement that in the interest of the users of the patent system, in particular SMEs, the cost of the Community patent must be affordable.
As regards the Community patent, discussions focused on the two main outstanding issues, i.e. translation arrangements and the distribution of revenue from renewal fees. It is felt that an agreement on these two issues would considerably facilitate an overall agreement on the Community patent Regulation. There was broad agreement that in the interest of the users of the patent system, in particular SMEs, the cost of the Community patent must be affordable.
As regards the Community patent, discussions focused on the two main outstanding issues, i.e. translation arrangements and the distribution of revenue from renewal fees. It is felt that an agreement on these two issues would considerably facilitate an overall agreement on the Community patent Regulation. There was broad agreement that in the interest of the users of the patent system, in particular SMEs, the cost of the Community patent must be affordable.
Well, it appears to me that one of the crucial points lies behind that quite pale wording according to which "While some delegations would prefer to keep progress on patent litigation separate from that on the Community patent, others are of the opinion that consensus should be reached on both areas simultaneously". From private sources who recently had attended the European Patent Forum event in Ljubljana sources I have been told that it seemed also that there is quite some opposition to that Council proposal for a European Patent Litigation solution and Community Patent. Despite the quite optimistic bulletins disseminated by the EU Presidency, success should not be taken for granted. Most probably, later this year the French EU Presidency will face a hard job to press that matter trough.
The creation of a community court system is quite similar to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), everybody thought it was a good idea until studies found out that its effect was to destroy the SME sector by raising costs.
There is a danger that the Community court will make the system more expensive for SMEs, especially from the eastern block of Europe (cost of litigation and damages is lower then in Germany for ex).
The most scary floor talk at the inventor's forum was one with the taboo word Alicante. Try it with a Munich patent technocrat of your choice, it works like onions, makes all the Germans cry, cry, cry and freak out. And you know, no one likes the Germans... Few years ago we got the same effects with 'Luxembourg'.
Spanish parliamentarians advocate the Alicante solution, probably there is something in the making from the Spanish government, and curse the EPO leaders as a bunch of corrupt bastards...
So under French presidency a new Spanish conspiracy will counter the existing German one. What will Sarko do? Screw it all up as expected...: "Ach wie gut das niemand weiss, dass ich Rumpelstilskin heiss." as you say in German.
Document 8992/08 issued by Slovenian EU Presidency to Permanent Representatives Committee (Part 1) on May 08, 2008, concerning potential enhancemet the patent system in Europe. Some of the key points of that Document quoted below read as follows:
Patents
Post a Comment
