No description available.

Yes / In this paper we study the determinants of the strength of patent enforcement in 43 member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO) between 1998 and 2011, a period after the signing of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement. We do so by building on and expanding the seminal work of Ginarte and Park (1997) on the pre-TRIPS determinants of patent rights in the years 1960-1990. We find that in the years after TRIPS was signed, the strength of patent enforcement of a country is positively determined by two variables that signify the usage of the patent and intellectual property system, and the number of patent and trademark applications. We also find that the level of research and development expenditure, the quality of human capital, and the level of development of a country have positive effects on the strength of the enforcement of patent law in practice. Intellectual property rights enforcement is one of the key investment-related policies included in the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development. Identifying the determinants of strong patent systems will help policymakers at the national and supranational levels to design and implement effective policies that strengthen national patent systems, thereby enhancing economic benefits such as greater levels of commercialization of intangible assets and greater levels of international trade and investment.

The accumulated importance of the patent law morality exclusion over the recent decades has been prompted by the increased protection sought for biotechnological inventions. This raises specific ethical concerns such as the respect for human dignity. The morality exclusion is regarded as an indispensable safeguard in the patent system of the 21st century, but its application and scope remains unclear, not least due to a division of competence between the European Union (EU), the European Patent Organisation and national Member States. In addition, the international Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO) sets minimum standards for the operation of the morality exclusion. In this study the scope, interpretation and application of the morality exclusion in European and international patent law is described and analysed by applying the legal dogmatic method. The object of study is the European patent law morality exclusion in terms of Article 53(a) and Rule 28 of the European Patent Convention and Article 6 of Directive 98/44/EC on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. A connected purpose of this study is to describe, problematize and analyse the compliance by the regional rules (EU, European Patent Organisation) with the international framework provided by Article 27.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Although this study is not limited to specific technologies, the majority of issues raised are done so in relation to the morality exclusion concerning biotechnological inventions, which is reflected in this work. Furthermore, the theoretical framework is dependent on the functioning of the morality exclusion in the respective systems, both regional (EU, European Patent Organisation) and international (WTO). This approach necessitates a consideration of the characteristics of each legal system. This thesis uncovers the differences in the interpretation of the morality exclusion (both within as well as between the legal systems), which causes legal uncertainty in this particularly complex field where patent law and ethics interact. The effects of such variations on the scope and application of the morality exclusion are clarified and critically reviewed. According to the wording of the morality exclusion, the commercial exploitation of an invention with regard to morality or ordre public is a central prerequisite in the assessment of excluded subject matter. Consequently, the interpretation of this particular requirement is subject to critical review, since its implications are decisive for the scope of application of the morality exclusion. It is furthermore questioned whether the European morality exclusions are TRIPS-compliant, and the possible effects (and available remedies) of non-compliance for the EU legal order are analysed. This in turn involves issues of norm conflicts in international and EU law. The author presents a critical analysis, investigates the interaction between legal systems and suggests clarifications in order to attain the optimal functioning of the morality exclusion.

L'impressionnante augmentation du nombre de dépôts de brevets, l'arrivée de nouvelles technologies mais également les nombreuses contestations du système des brevets invitent à se pencher sur la façon dont la notion de brevetabilité a su faire face à l'évolution des techniques et des pratiques. La présente étude propose d'analyser l'évolution contemporaine de la notion de brevetabilité en observant d'abord l'élargissement du domaine de la brevetabilité, avant de s'intéresser à l'assouplissement des conditions de brevetabilité. Les vecteurs de cette évolution vers une plus grande protection sont la lacune législative en matière de définition de l'invention et le recul successif des exclusions à la brevetabilité. Il ressort en outre de l'étude que le critère d'application industrielle doit être vu comme participant de la nature de l'invention, et non comme une condition de brevetabilité. Il apparaît également qu'en réaction à la complexité des nouvelles technologies et à la pression des acteurs économiques, les conditions de nouveauté et d'activité inventive se voient particulièrement assouplies. L'étude conclut a un abaissement du seuil de brevetabilité et à la prolifération de brevets de mauvaises qualité ayant un impact négatif sur l'innovation. / The impressive increase of patent applications, the advent of new technologies but also the numerous challenges that the patent system has to face invite to look at the way the notion of patentability copes with the evolution of art and practices. The present study analyses the evolution of the notion of patentability by observing at first the widening of patentability field, before looking at the softening.of patentability criteria. The means of this evolution toward a wider protection are the absence of any legal definition of invention and the successive backward movement of patentability exclusions. It is shown that industrial application must be seen as part of the ivention definition and not as a criterion. It also appears that in reaction to the complexification of technologies and the pressure of economic actors, novelty and non-obviousness criteria have been largely softened. The conclusion of the study is that the decrease of the patentability threshold and the increase of bad quality patents have a negative impact on innovation.

本論文以最高法院涉專利侵權民事訴訟判決為分析對象，而進行類型化的研究。本論文發現此類判決可分為「法律解釋爭議」、「專利爭議中鑑定報告證據力的認定爭議」、「損害賠償請求權或其他請求權基礎之爭議」、以及「特殊問題」等四個類型。而根據此類型化方式，我們可以系統化看待最高法院的判決對專利法發展的影響和貢獻。 / In this thesis, several patent infringement decisions of the Highest Court were analyzed for grouping. The decisions were further grouped by the legal issues therein into four types, “question of law,” “evidence of patent infringement analysis,” “cause of action,” and “special issue.” Through the grouping, the effects and contributations of the Highest Court over the patent law can be systematically studied.

Germany’s economic dominance in Europe, generous investment incentives, and technical manufacturing prowess has encouraged an influx of Chinese-led inbound activity, concentrated in high-tech sector mergers and acquisitions. A close examination of these M&As yields evidence of systemic Chinese state-financing through both state-owned and private vehicles that likely stems from China’s “Made in China 2025” policy, which hopes to stem capital outflow and to indigenize technological innovation. As Germany braces for what it sees to be continuous attempts by China to take patented German technology through M&As, it worries that Chinese patent law will allow for rampant patent infringement by copycat Chinese entities. This paper presents an overview of the root causes of China’s heavy economic activity in Germany, as well as an analysis of the legal concerns held by German firms based on a close reading of the Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China and strategic recommendations for German companies hoping to work with or in China.

Many patent law dilemmas arise from a failure to understand technologies as embedded in broader social, economic and political realities and to contextually analyze these legal phenomena. This narrowness leads to poor legal development, of which the modern medical exception from patentability is one example. Judges have difficulty interpreting it, patentees do not understand its purpose and it does not protect the important medical technologies to which the public would like access. This thesis applies a legal pluralist analysis to examine the emergence of the medical methods exception in order to understand why it was created and legislated. It starts by examining the origins of the exception in the caselaw, and the informal, concurrent norm established by the emerging medical profession in the early 20th century. It then proceeds to examine why the medical profession might have sought and enforced a norm prohibiting its members from patenting, and concludes that this arose from the need of the medical profession to distance itself from the patent law. As a result, professionalizing physicians established an internal normative order that mimicked and in many cases replaced the effect of the formal law. The thesis then proceeds to examine how the form of the informal norm evolved in the period between WWI and WWII, finding that the profession’s norm transformed and broke down concurrently with its efforts to achieve external legitimacy through legislation. That breakdown arose from factors which included growing labour mobility, greater understanding of the benefits of patents, and a growing role of science and industry in medicine that threatened the profession’s access to valuable medical innovation. The thesis concludes with a study of a current case (Myriad Genetics) that applies the thesis’ theoretical framework to a present dispute over the role the law should play in regulating genetic diagnostic tests.

During the last two decades many pharmaceutical originator companies have struggled with refilling its pipelines with novel pharmaceutical products. At the same time many of these companies have lost patent protection for its most profitable drugs and more are expected to do so in the very near future. When pharmaceutical patents expire it is generally expected that generic manufacturers enter the market with significantly cheaper versions of the pre-patented drugs. Accordingly, generic entry poses strong competitive price pressure on originator companies and the latter may therefore be inclined to hinder these competitors from entering the market. The preparations for generic launch often starts a few years before patent expiry and it is therefore common that patent disputes arise. Patent disputes are not only highly complex, time consuming and costly, the disputes are often also characterized by a high degree of uncertainty to whether or not the patents are infringed and/or valid. Thus, incentives for settling the disputes out of court are often high for both originator and generic undertakings. Legitimate patent settlement agreements are generally not considered to pose any competitive concern. However, the Commission has observed that these settlement agreements has been used to conceal anti-competitive terms by which the originator companies sets out to buy off its generic competitors for delaying its plans to enter the market. These anti-competitive arrangements are more generally known as pay-for-delay settlements. The Commission has issued two decisions against pay-for-delay settlements of which the GC has confirmed the Commission’s assessments. After fulfilling a three-step criteria developed by the Commission, these agreements were considered to have as its object the restriction of competition within the meaning of article 101 (1) TFEU. When an agreement is categorized as a restriction by object it is considered to be by its very nature restrictive of competition, and is therefore presumptively illegal. This approach has been vastly criticized in the legal doctrine for not being sufficiently clear and legally certain. Therefore, the purpose of this essay has been to critically analyze the Commission’s approach in assessing patent settlement agreements. The overall findings of the analysis do however indicate that the Commission’s categorization of pay-for-delay settlements as restrictions of competition by object follows the established rules of EU competition law and should therefore be justified.

Die Arbeit untersucht die Durchsetzung von Ansprüchen auf Unterlassung aus standardessentiellen Patenten (SEP). Ausgehend von den ökonomischen und rechtsdogmatischen Grundlagen des Patentrechts wird zunächst die Legitimation des Anspruchs auf Unterlassung im Gefüge des Patentrechts untersucht und der Frage nachgegangen, inwieweit die Gewährung von Ausschließlichkeitsbefugnissen zur Verwirklichung der Ziele von Innovationsschutz und -förderung notwendig ist. Die Prüfung kommt zu dem Schluss, dass die Ausübung des Anspruchs auf Unterlassung aus SEP unter Umständen eine ökonomisch und rechtsdogmatisch unerwünschte Blockadeposition herbeiführen kann, so dass eine Einschränkung des Anspruchs zur Sicherung der innovationsfördernden Funktionen des Patentrechts geboten sein kann. Sodann werden verschiedene Lösungsansätze diskutiert und dabei besonderes Augenmerk auf die durch die deutsche und europäische Rechtsprechung entwickelte kartellrechtliche Lösung gelegt. Nach einer Betrachtung der Tatbestandsmerkmale des kartellrechtlichen Verbots des Missbrauchs von Marktmacht nach Art. 102 AEUV bzw. §§ 19, 20 GWB und deren Anwendung auf Fälle der Erhebung von Unterlassungsklagen aus SEP wird diese Lösung abgelehnt. Der Tatbestand des Missbrauchs von Markmacht vermag wegen der Fokussierung auf (Produkt-)märkte und des Erfordernisses einer marktbeherrschenden Stellung als Anwendungsvoraussetzung bei stringenter Auslegung der Vorschrift nicht alle relevanten Fälle zu fassen. Im Folgenden werden Ansätze diskutiert und bewertet, welche eine rechtliche Verankerung der Einschränkung des Anspruchs auf Unterlassung eher im Vertrags- oder im Patentrecht selbst suchen. Als Ergebnis wird sich schließlich dafür ausgesprochen, das in § 23 PatG für die Abgabe einer Lizenzbereitschaftserklärung vorgesehene Verfahren mit seinen wechselseitigen Pflichten analog auf Fälle der Erhebung einer Unterlassungsklage aus SEP anzuwenden und die Zulässigkeit der Erhebung von Unterlassungsklagen nach diesem Maßstab zu beurteilen. / The work analyzes the enforcement of claims for injunctive relief based on standard-essential patens (SEP). Taking the economic and legal foundations of patent law as a starting point, the legitimacy of the claim for injunctive relief within the system of patent law is assessed, as is the question of whether granting the power to exclude others from use of a patented technology is necessary for protecting and promoting innovation. It is found that injunctive relief based on a SEP can lead to an economically and legally unwanted blocking position, in favor of the patent holder, which may require restricting the exclusive right of the patent holder in order to ensurethe patent's function of promoting innovation. Following this, different approaches for solving the issue are discussed. A special focus is put on antitrust law which has been used as a basis to limit injunctive relief by the German and European courts. After considering the elements of Art. 102 TFEU, §§ 19, 20 of the German Antitrust Code (GWB) respectively, the application of antitrust law is rejected. Due to its focus on (product-)markets and the requirement of a dominant market position, antitrust law is not fit to sufficiently limit the negative impact that injunctive relief from a SEP might have on innovation. The work further discusses and assesses other approaches which are trying to apply contract law or certain provisions of patent law. As a result, it is suggested to analogously apply the procedure set out in § 23 PatG (German Patent Code) and its system of mutual obligations to assess the legitimacy of injunctive relief in SEP-cases

Thesis deals with the patentability of an invention in terms of the law of selected countries and international law. The theoretical part contains a general introduction of patent law, its principles and differences in regulation in selected legal systems. Further analysis is focused on the regulation of conditions of patentability, namely novelty, in European law. The practical part contains an analysis of the decisions of the European Patent Office and the Industrial Property Office of the Czech Republic in selected areas of assessing the novelty of the invention. On the ground of the previous decisions will be identified the issues which are the most frequent subjects of disputes; will be pointed out the controversial decisions and will be identified the key criteria on the basis of which should be in similar disputes in the future decided.