Next Steps and further Problems ahead for EU Patent Package
As reported, last week’s European Council summit has reached an agreement on the EU Unified Patent and a EU Unified Patent Court after volatile negotiations on 29 June 2012.
The EU Council thus made a big step forward on its way to achieve the final goal, as expressed in the annex of Doc 10059/12 of 24 May 2012:
On the 1st of April 2014 the system should be ready for the first registration of a European patent with unitary effect.
However, a number of steps – and one big legal problem – still remain to be taken. Already this July, the EU Parliament will have its first plenary session on the EU Patent Package that was postponed on 19 December 2011 by JURI (cf. minutes) and the EU Council will consider the issue as well:
- 3./4. July 2012: Parliamentary deliberations and votes on the three aspects of the “EU Patent Package” (unitary patent, translation arrangement, unified patent court);
- July 2012: Adoption of the Unitary Patent Regulation (unitary patent, translation arrangement) by the EU Council.
But it cannot be expected that the process will run smoothly, as the top-level negotiations at last week’s EU Summit ‘suggested’ – apparently under the pressure of David Cameron and eurosceptic Tory MPs lead by Bill Cash, Chairman of the influential Scrutiny Committee and ‘herald of the apocalypse‘ -
that Articles 6 to 8 of the [Unitary Patent] Regulation [...] to be adopted by the Council and the European Parliament be deleted.
This basically means that the European Court of Justice (CJEU) will not any more be competent to decide on question related to substantive patent law, such as patentability or infringement and effects of EU patents, which has to be considered as an open declaration of deep mistrust, if not political warfare against the CJEU. In a couple of years we may look back and consider this EU summit as the beginning of the end of the UK’s EU membership. It does not come as a surprise that “David Cameron has opened the door to a historic referendum on Britain’s future relationship with the European Union” in yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph.
Even thought removing Articles 6 to 8 UPR was exactly the goal of a strong and illustrious ‘opposition movement’ considerably supported by UK patent professionals (see our analysis here and here), this last-minute twist might well result in further trouble, as the CJEU already demanded the juridical supremacy of the EU’s highest court over all legal aspects relating to EU patents in its Opinion 1/09 of 8 March 2011 regarding the former EEUPC project (see reports here and here).
This problem will surely be addressed by the EU Parliament’s legal committee (JURI) this week, as its green light for the Unitary Patent Regulation in late December (see press release) was based on a text comprising Articles 6 to 8.
Despite some intense attempts to persuade JURI otherwise (cf. EPLAW briefing) and JURI member Cecilia Wikström‘s explicit support for EPLAW’s wish to cancel Articles 6 to 9 UPR, back in December last year, JURI (members) recommended to accepted Amendments 12 to 18 of the proposed regultation (COM(2011)0215; JURI draft report PE472.059) and to request only minor amendments but no cancellation of Articles 6 to 9 (see PE478.655v01-00, page 5, item 16). It is hard to imagine that the JURI committee and the Rapporteurs in charge will completely change its/their views on Articltes 6 to 9 or that the Parliament will vote against JURI’s recommendation.
It appears that we are still not at the end of the road, as it is not only hoped by anti-(software-)patent campaigners [1, 2, 3] but also assumed by knowledgable pro-IP observers [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].
Volker 'Falk' Metzler
European Patent Attorney, German 'Patentanwalt', European Trademark and Design Attorney, Computer Scientist, PhD, IP Blogger, Father of Two, Mountain Enthusiast
5 Responses to Next Steps and further Problems ahead for EU Patent Package
The k/s/n/h::law blog
Some of the patent attorneys of the KSNH law firm have joined their efforts to research what is going on in the various branches of IP law and practice in order to keep themselves, their clients as well as interested circles of the public up to date. This blog is intended to present results of such efforts to a wider public.
Blog Archives
- November 2013 (2)
- October 2013 (1)
- September 2013 (1)
- August 2013 (2)
- July 2013 (3)
- June 2013 (5)
- March 2013 (5)
- February 2013 (4)
- January 2013 (5)
- December 2012 (5)
- November 2012 (5)
- July 2012 (5)
- June 2012 (8)
- May 2012 (5)
- April 2012 (3)
- March 2012 (4)
- February 2012 (5)
- January 2012 (6)
- December 2011 (12)
- November 2011 (9)
- October 2011 (9)
- September 2011 (4)
- August 2011 (7)
- July 2011 (4)
- June 2011 (1)
Blog Categories
- business methods (6)
- EPC (7)
- EPO (12)
- EU law (92)
- ACTA (8)
- CJEU (4)
- Comitology (1)
- competition law (2)
- Enforcement (6)
- EU Unified Patent Court (62)
- FTA India (1)
- TFEU (2)
- Trade Marks (5)
- European Patent Law (37)
- German Patent ACt (PatG) (1)
- German patent law (5)
- Germany (6)
- Pirate Party (3)
- International Patent Law (4)
- PCT (2)
- IP politics (10)
- licenses (2)
- Litigation (5)
- Patentability (7)
- Patents (12)
- Piratenpartei (2)
- Software inventions (10)
- Uncategorized (9)
- Unitary Patent (24)
- US Patent Law (4)
Comments
- kelle on Germany: Copyright Protection More Easily Available For Works Of “Applied Arts”
- Time Limits & Deadlines in Draft UPCA RoP: Counting The Days - KSNH Law - Intangible.Me on Wiki Edition of Agreement on Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA)
- Time Limits & Deadlines in Draft UPCA RoP: Counting The Days | ksnh::law on Wiki Edition of Agreement on Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA)
- Wiki Edition of Agreement on Unified Patent Cou... on Wiki Edition of Agreement on Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA)
- European Commission Takes Next Step Towards Legalising Software Patents in Europe | Techrights on EU Commission publishes Proposal of amendend Brussels I Regulation for ensuring Enforcement of UPC Judgements
Blogroll
- 12:01 Tuesday
- America-Israel Patent Law
- Anticipate This!
- AwakenIP
- BlawgIT
- BLOG@IPJUR.COM
- BP/G Radio Intellectual Property Podcast
- Broken Symmetry
- Class 46
- Director's Forum: David Kappos' Public Blog
- Gray on Claims
- I/P UPDATES
- IAM Magazine Blog
- Intellectual Property Intelligence Blog
- IP Asset Maximizer Blog
- IP CloseUp
- IP Dragon
- IP Watch
- IP Watchdog
- IPBIZ
- ipeg
- IPKat
- ITC 337 Law Blog
- Just a Patent Examiner
- K's Law
- MISSION INTANGIBLE
- Patent Baristas
- Patent Circle
- Patent Docs
- Patently Rubbish
- PatentlyO
- Patents Post-Grant
- Reexamination Alert
- SPICY IP
- Tangible IP
- The 271 Patent Blog
- The Intangible Economy
- THE INVENT BLOG®
- Think IP Strategy
- Tufty the Cat
- Visae Patentes
The KSNH blogging landscape
This blog and the German-language sister blog k/s/n/h::jur link to the two popular and privately run blogs IPJur und VisaePatentes and continue their work and mission with a widened scope and under the aegis of our IP law firm.
ksnhlaw on Twitter
- No public Twitter messages.
KSNH::JUR Feed (german)
- Ist Verschlüsselung passé? September 6, 2013Auf verschiedenen Feldern beruflicher Praxis ist dafür zu sorgen, dass Kommunikation vertraulich bleibt. Die trifft beispielsweise für Ärzte zu, aber auch für Anwälte, darunter auch Patentanwälte. Einer der zahlreichen Aspekte, die in diesem Zusammenhang eine Rolle spielen, ist die Technik, um die Vertraulichkeit beruflicher Kommunikation sicherzustellen. Wa […]
- EU-Einheitspatent: Demonstrativer Optimismus und Zahlenmystik allerorten – Naivität oder politische Beeinflussung? June 26, 2013Nach mehreren vergeblichen Anläufen zur Schaffung eines EU-weiten Patentsystems wurde 1973 als Kompromiss das Europäische Patentübereinkommen unterzeichnet, welches unabhängig von der seinerzeit noch EWG genannten Europäischen Union System zur zentralisierten Patenterteilung mit nachgeordnetem Einspruchsverfahren durch das Europäische Patentamt schuf. Wie wi […]
- Moderne Zeiten oder: DPMA und Patentgericht streiten über die elektronische Akte April 25, 2013Bekanntlich hat das Deutsche Patent- und Markenamt (DPMA) im Jahre 2013 mit der rein technischen Fertigstellung der Einrichtungen zur elektronischen Akteneinsicht einen wichtigen Meilenstein seines Überganges von der Papierakte zur “elektronischen Akte” erreicht. Im DPMA werden aber bereits seit dem 01. Juni 2011 Patente, Gebrauchsmuster, Topografien und erg […]
- Gutachten zu Forschung, Innovation und technologischer Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands 2013 March 11, 2013Unter dem Datum vom 28. Februar 2013 ist die Bundestags-Drucksache 17/12611 veröffentlicht worden Sie trägt den Titel Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung - Gutachten zu Forschung, Innovation und technologischer Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands 2013. Die Bundesregierung legt dem Deutschen Bundestag seit dem Jahr 2008 […]
- 3D-Printing: Zum Filesharing von 3D-Modelldaten February 25, 2013In meiner kleinen zuvor angekündigten Reihe über rechtliche Aspekte des 3D Printing komme ich heute auf die Frage zu sprechen, ob die Hersteller von Gerätschaften es hinnehmen müssen, wenn Ersatztreile davon – vom Brillengestell über Smartphone-Gehäuseteile bis hin zu Rastenmähermotor-Abdeckungen – gescannt und die daraus […]
- Ist Verschlüsselung passé? September 6, 2013
Please don’t misunderstand me. First I’m not an “anti-patent” campaigner. I’m against software patents, but for the unitary patent, I think I’ve proposed some attempt to give legal certainty to the regulation. Which is not obviously the main concern for European Council.
Also, I’ve never said that it is the end of the road. Just that with articles 6-8 removed, the whole project is sure to be nullified.
And I’m not the only one saying this, see Why the European Council has killed any workable EU patent.
For what I’ve read, we share the same analysis on deletion of arts 6-8, don’t we?
Despite what the unleached propaganda in the press wants to make the public believe, it is completely doubtful whether an agreement can be reached. It will be interesting to see how politics want to get out of this mess which they have caused, this rather looks like an inescapable trap.
The first MEPs have already complained about the “agreement” reached on Friday, cf. http://jutta-steinruck.blogspot.de/2012/07/eu-patent-nachste-woche-im.html. On her blog, German MEP Jutta Steinruck (S&D) comments (expressly giving this statement as being the position of the German Socialist party!):
“By its one-sided revocation of the negotiation result reached in the trilogue, the Council has broken its word. The Socialist Members of the (German) Parliament criticize this approach sharply. It is now completely open how to deal with this situation.”
The result reached on Friday confirms one thing very clearly: The politicians in charge of the negotiations on the UPLS have no idea what they are talking about, the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing!
[...] Parliament simply will swallow the pill prescribed by the European Council last week; see e.g. here and [...]
[...] As reported here and elsewhere [1, 2, 3], the European Council agreed on the EU Unitary Patent and a EU Unified Patent Court at last week’s Brussels EU summit after volatile negotiations – by ‘suggesting’ two significant amendments (see summit conclusion, page 2, item 3) as compared to what was know from the latest available draft text of the Unitary Patent Regulation dated 23 June 2011 (see here and here). [...]
[...] of the EU Parliament in general and those of its legal committee (JURI) in particular (see here and here), the direction in which today’s JURI meeting would go was not utterly hard to [...]