It is commonplace that patents represent an
absolute right giving the owner thereof a potential to effectively create, if so desired, a
monopoly by asking a Court to grant
injunctive relief. This potential to get injunctive relief belongs to the
crown jewels of the present patent system of our days. It enables patent holders to create and maintain
vertically organised economic structures governed basically by the principles of
command and control: The entity holding the patent decides (and, with the aid of the Court system, enforces) as to whether or not and, if, by whom and under which conditions, the subject-matter of the patent claims may be worked in real life. For many of the IP people of the day, any politically motivated attempt to weaken the provision of injunctive relief in patent law would create perceptions next to an emasculation.
All this appears to have worked fine as long as the mainstream of our economic system was built around principles of command and control: In the 20th century, a large majority of entities acting on the theatre of economy did accept this rule of the game. If they ever acquired patent rights, they would have been ready, at least as some sort of ultima ratio, to enforce them against competitors on the basis of injunctive relief. In turn, on a political point of view, most entities accepted to fall victim of an injunction order if they ever should be found guilty of a patent infringement.
However, during the first decade of the 21st century we have to take notice of the growing importance of horizontally organised collaboration and interoperability. This does not mean that the old-fashioned command and control mode of governing industries would go extinct overnight. But an increasing perception creeps in suggesting that the practical importance and, hence, the political weight of collaboration and interoperability is on the rise.
If this perception is true and well-founded, then there should be no doubt that the patent system will have to follow somehow in due time.
Reluctant attempts to adapt the present patent system more to the requirements of collaboration and interoperability have recently been undertaken e.g. by IBM by proposing the utilisation of the concept of licence of right in the context of a future EU Community Patent. Article 20 (1) of the Draft Regulation of 08. March 2004 (Document 7119/04) does already have an opt-in provision for such a Licence of Right. As it is known, the hope to get some EU Community Patent in any foreseeable future appears to be fading away.Some countries do have a Licence of Right provision in their respective patent law (e.g. Germany); however, without a EU Community Patent bringing this option to the entire territory of the EU IBM's approach might get unhinged. Moreover, some other players from big industry were not amused to see IBM promoting this issue called Soft IP.
I do not offer any solution here. Just in order to get an idea of the scope of the transformation of the world we live in since the beginning of the ICT revolution I consider the presentation embedded below and given by Mr Thomas Friedman extremely useful and, at the same time, also entertaining (Link thanks to Mr on digitalpublic.de). He speaks on the MIT campus to discuss the 2007 update to his bestseller The World is Flat. He also provides a preview of his latest book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded. It is not about IP or patent law at all; it is an attempt to grasp the immense transformation we currently are witness of.
won the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for commentary. He became The New York Times' foreign-affairs columnist in 1995. Previously, he served as chief economic correspondent in the Washington bureau and before that he was the chief White House correspondent. In 2005, Mr. Friedman was elected as a member of the Pulitzer Prize Board.
(Photo: Wikipedia)