FRANDly fire: are industry standards doing more harm than good?

Legal context: The role of IP rights in standards; the meaning of the obligationimposed by many standards bodies on essential patent holdersto licence on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (‘FRAND’)terms; the example of IPR policy of the European TelecommunicationsStandards Institute; recent US developments. Key points: Industry standards are of key commercial and technical significance.Yet many standards are currently burdened by litigation betweenessential patent holders and licensees. Such standards bodieshave been slow to give guidance on the meaning of the obligationsimposed on essential patent holders. This article takes theexample of the obligation to licence essential patents on FRANDterms, analysing the obligation in the context of European competitionlaw. The article concludes with some suggestions for pointsfor companies to include in their internal policies on licensingstandards essential patents. Practical significance: The meaning of the obligation to licence on FRAND terms is veryimportant for licensors and licensees alike. This article putsthe obligation in context and discusses the various approacheswhich may be taken in practice.     

Technology transfer offices and university patenting in Sweden and Germany

This paper analyses the factors that impact on the decision of researchers to patent their research results. Particular emphasis is put on the role of technology transfer offices. It builds on a survey of university professors in Sweden and Germany. The regression results show that researchers that received support from the public infrastructure and researchers that have experience with the patenting system—through own previous patents or joint patent applications with firms—are much more likely to apply for patents.     

Patent auctions: business and investment strategy in IP commercialization

Legal context. This article concerns patent sale and licensing,asset deals connected with M&A and intangible asset transactions. Key points. Patent owners might find patent auctions a fastway to sell or license their patents. There is a high probabilitythat bidders will purchase or license low- or no- value patentsbecause patent auctions set a very tight time frame for bidders’due diligence. The nature of the patent right creates a bigimbalance in terms of knowledge between owner of the patentand the purchaser or licensee; the latter party can only minimizethe risk of purchasing or licensing a "zero" or low value patentby receiving sufficient time to investigate the patents. IPauctions may however be a better and safer means of purchasingor licensing domain names or trade marks, due to their legalnature. Practical significance. Many companies might believe that patentauction is a swift and effective way to find a purchaser ora licensee for their IP rights. Even so, it is imperative thatthe bidders themselves conduct a proper due diligence of thepatents offered, corresponding to their needs and to their assessmentof their true financial and business value.     

Claim construction and the extent of patent protection: A comparative analysis of the Phillips en banc Federal Circuit decision

Legal context. The United Kingdom's House of Loads in Kirin-Amgenand the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuitin Phillips addressed similar issues with respect to the methodologyof claim interpretation and the fundamental rules and policiesfor determining the extent of patent protection. This articlewill review Phillips and Kirin-Amgen from the comparative lawperspective. It will compare the UK and US rules and patentpolicies with their German and Japanese counterparts, discussingthe bases for these differences and examining them from theperspective of patent policies, specifically with respect tofair protection and legal certainty. Key points. Despite the use of the same rule and methodology,legal commentators and patent professionals emphasize the differencesin the extent of patent protection in different jurisdictions.Such differences result from the availability of the doctrineof equivalents. For jurisdictions such as the UK, the US andJapan, where courts seldom apply the doctrine of equivalents,the differences result from the way in which the courts conductclaim construction. These courts use the perspective of a hypotheticalperson to support a broad or narrow claim construction, reflectingthe weight given to the competing patent policies. Practical significance. This article cites key cases for claimconstruction and the doctrine of equivalents in four major patentjurisdictions: the UK, the US, Germany and Japan. Knowledgeof the case law trends in these jurisdictions is essential fordrafting patents documents and enforcing patents.     

Regulatory Jurisdiction and the WTO

The WTO is not explicitly concerned with the problem of regulatoryjurisdiction in connection with prudential regulation (as opposedto industrial policy regulation). However, as the WTO has addressedincreasingly complex regulatory barriers to trade, it has developedseveral devices that have the implicit effect of allocatingregulatory jurisdiction among states.This article reviews afew illustrative cases in WTO law, including Helms–Burton,Shrimp, and Gambling. This review suggests how these cases maybe understood as dealing with allocation of regulatory jurisdiction.Negative integration rules such as national treatment or proportionalitymay serve as devices applied by tribunals for allocation ofregulatory authority. The WTO has very limited rules of positiveintegration—whereby states either harmonize regulationor agree on more specific allocations of regulatory authority,such as mutual recognition. However, it has developed a modestdegree of capacity to engage in positive regulation, or to referto positive integration rules developed in other contexts, suchas Codex Alimentarius. Finally, this article examines theoreticalbases for allocating and reallocating regulatory jurisdictionin order to establish a framework by which to analyse the roleof the WTO in this context.     

Mal dato, ma ben ricevuto

Mal dato, ma ben ricevuto is a rather untranslatable Italianexpression which refers to acts that are based on wrong assumptionsbut whose final results (might) make everybody better off. MsSueffert's article is a good example. In her article, Ms Sueffertsuggests that the USPTO might reduce patent examiners' workloads—andthe resulting tendency towards granting patents that shouldnot be granted in the first place—by using ‘softscientists’ (psychologists, economists, political scientists,     

Exclusion payments in patent settlements: a legal and economic perspective

Legal context. The application of antitrust law to assess settlementsof patent litigation raises difficult issues concerning theappropriate balance of patent law and competition policy. Recentprivate and public invocations of US antitrust law to challengesettlement agreements covering pharmaceutical patents have broughtthese issues to the forefront. The agreements share the commonfeature of an ‘exclusion payment’ from a brand-namedrug manufacturer (the patentee) to a generic drug manufacturer(the accused infringer) in exchange for a promise by the genericcompany to refrain from marketing its product for some time.US federal courts that have examined these agreements have variedin their approach and conclusions regarding the appropriateantitrust analysis to be applied to these settlements. Key points. This article argues that informed antitrust analysisof such agreements must take due note of the ‘probabilistic’nature of patent property rights. Practical significance. The article concludes that exclusionpayments fall outside the scope of a patent's exclusionary scopeand thus are subject to antitrust scrutiny. It demonstratesthat barring anticompetitive exclusion payments in settlementnegotiation prevents collusive bargains that harm consumer welfarewithout discouraging efficient settlements.     

The interplay between IP rights and competition law in the context of standardization

Legal context: This article attempts to analyse the patent ambush scenarioin the context of both competition law and IP rights under USand EC law. The regulators such as the US FTC and European Commissionattempt to combat the abuses, however the legal tools availablerequire a very difficult balancing act between patent law (whichprotects innovation) and competition law (which attempts tohamper abuse of the free market rules). Key points: The patent ambush scenario employed within a standard-settingorganization poses an important threat of jeopardizing the goalsof achieving a common standard. The response to the problemconcentrates on ensuring that the rules applicable to standard-settingorganizations' members prevent abuse and/or reaching reasonableand non-discriminatory licensing terms to stop deriving unduebenefits from proprietary technologies embedded in the standard. Practical significance: As the information exchange technologies become increasinglypopular, the need to ensure interoperability between productsof different manufacturers employing these technologies becomescrucial for market success. This consequently increases thedanger of malignant abuse of co-operation within the standardsetting-organizations. The law may need to step in to securetechnological progress free of risks such as the patent ambush.     

应对公共健康危机的药品专利强制许可实施困境与对策

药品专利强制许可作为一项应对公共健康危机的制度在国内外均得到了立法与政策体认.鉴于其所关涉利益关系的复杂性,这项制度从产生至今仍然争议不断.具体到这项制度的实施,其程序和效果存在更多不确定性.尽管当前一些国家已经通过实施强制许可以应对新冠肺炎疫情,但是围绕发展中国家能力不足、除了专利之外药品所涉其他知识产权许可的不确定性以及《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》第31条修正案的低援引率等方面仍然存在诸多争议.中国虽然建立了从立法到政策的专利强制许可规则体系,但是对于在公共健康危机背景下由政府部门决定实施的药品专利强制许可仍然缺乏更为明确细化的程序规定.我国需要在谦抑性、审慎性、灵活性的理念指引下,在切实保障专利权人权益的基础上完善药品专利强制许可的实施机制.     

Chinese university patents: quantity,quality, and the role of subsidy programs

Chinese university patenting has gained importance in recent years. Using a comprehensive dataset of university patents by 155 leading Chinese universities from 1991 to 2009, our study pursues two objectives: First, we analyze the quantity and quality of patents filed by leading Chinese universities. Second, we analyze the role of subsidy programs with regard to university patenting in China. With regard to the first objective, our results show that university patents witnessed rapid growth in terms of quantity while patent quality did not increase to a similar degree. Regarding the second objective, we find that a subsidy program to promote research excellence at selected universities is a significant driver of patent quantity and quality. In contrast, a subsidy program that decreases the costs of patent applications seems to enhance patent quantity but not patent quality. We conclude that innovation policies which aim to stimulate patents of higher quality should focus primarily on increasing university R&D, and to a lesser extent on decreasing the costs of university patenting.     

Design protection for technical products

Legal context. The shape and the function of a product are oftenclosely related (‘form follows function’) whichopens the way for double protection of novel features by a patentand a design. The simultaneous application for both rights canbe done in a fast and cost efficient way by using the figuresof the patent application for the design registration. Key points. With this in mind, the design registration may notcover the novel features in its broadest terms, since designlaw does not apply to ideas, concepts, or methods. However,the design provides protection for a concrete embodiment andthereby offers some relief for a patent applicant in need ofimmediate action against copying. Although, certain conditionshave to be observed where simultaneous protection is sought,there is no doubt that a patent covering an invention in itsgeneral form and a registered design protecting a specific embodimentof the invention may coexist with no mutual negative effectto their respective validity. Practical significance. Having an enforceable protection rightfor an embodiment of an invention at hand a long time beforethe corresponding patent is granted is a valuable asset in anIP portfolio. The additional costs incurred by a design registrationare insignificant in comparison with the costs for the patent.     

Patent Protection in Europe: Integrating Europe into the Community or the Community into Europe?

Patent protection in Europe basically rests on two pillars: national grants or grants from the European Patent Organisation (EPO). The EPO grants patents by a centralised procedure with uniform conditions, but once granted the patents become national and subject to the divergent national laws of EPO–Member States. The system has been very successful, so successful, indeed, that it overshadowed the Community's many unsuccessful attempts to set up a Community patent system of its own by way of a convention between Member States. As the Commission has recently stepped in by proposing the establishment of a Community Patent system by way of regulation, a kind of 'cooperative rivalry' has arisen between the Community and the EPO about how to unify patent protection in Europe. This rivalry not only mirrors divergent views on the politico–economic functions of the patent system, but also is illustrative of different concepts of regional integration in a context of global competition for innovation.     

Business to the rescue: private sector actors and global environmental regimes’ legitimacy

In 2006, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted decision VIII/17 to further involve the private sector in the activities of the Convention. This initiative mainly aims at improving the current regime’s legitimacy. By increasing business involvement, decision VIII/17 can be viewed within the context of the current academic debate on the ‘privatisation’ of environmental governance, which refers to the growing importance of private actors in the formulation of environmental policies. Against this background, this article aims at: (1) assessing the extent to which decision VIII/17 might reverse the CBD’s legitimacy crisis and (2) analysing the issues at stake when private sector actors are involved in environmental regimes. In order to do so, the article analyses the consequences of decision VIII/17 in terms of internal—representation and transparency—and external—institutional efficiency and implementation—legitimacy. The study is based on an extended empirical scrutiny of the negotiations linked to decision VIII/17. While adopting a general conceptualisation of legitimacy, the value added by the study is to broaden the usual understanding of business strategies towards environmental issues. In particular, this article shows how decision VIII/17 has generated several reactions—defensive as well as proactive—among the business community. At the practical level, the article proposes several recommendations to secure a constructive participation of all categories of business actors in biodiversity governance. At the theoretical level, it calls for a change in deterministic visions of economic actors’ interests.

我国专利间接侵权的困境及立法建议

为保护专利权人的合法利益,适应经济生活的客观需求,我国应对专利间接侵权做出明确规定,而不宜适用共同侵权规则。侵权责任法作为民事权利保护的基本法,对间接侵权应该有一个抽象概括的规定,以使专利法等法律规定的间接侵权有一个上位法的依据。而且,专利法对专利间接侵权的构成要件也应做出详细规定,以区别于专利直接侵权和专利共同侵权。     

Making drugs available at affordable prices: how universities' technology transfer offices can help developing countries

Legal context: In recent years, the prices at which medicines are soldin, and to, developing countries has become a hot politicalsubject affecting the international pharmaceutical industry.Specific legislative measures have followed the political debate,including (1) the EU Regulation 816/2006 on ‘compulsorylicensing of patents relating to the manufacture of pharmaceuticalproducts for export to countries with public health problems’and (2) the The Doha Declaration adopted by the Fourth MinisterialConference of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 2001, andthe subsequent Decisions by the WTO General Council to implementthe Declaration in August 2003 and to amend the TRIPs (Trade-RelatedAspects of Intellectual Property Rights) Agreement in December2005. Universities are increasingly considering whether to includeterms in their licence agreements with pharmaceutical companiesthat address this issue. Key points and practical significance: Universities may wish to consider whether it is part of theirmission to negotiate special terms in licence agreements tobenefit the developing world. Where universities decide that,in principle, they wish to include ‘humanitarian-licensing’clauses in their licence agreements, they need to find a formof words that is likely to achieve their objectives and be acceptableto pharmaceutical industry licensees. This article considerssome of the options and suggests some specimen wording.     

Dealing with corruption: the next steps

The 1997 White Paper from the British Government's Department for International Development (DFID) was specific in identifying the role of governance now being addressed by international and national donors: “improving governance can ... improve the lives of poor people directly. It is also essential for creating the environment for faster economic growth. Both aspects can be compromised by corruption, which all governments must address. In developing countries it is the poor who bear proportionally the heaviest cost“ (DFID, 1997, p. 30). Dealing with corruption is thus a priority both in terms of who it most affects and in terms of which objectives of governance — including participatory and responsive government and economic growth — it constrains. Although it has long held a specialist academic interest, corruption has become the subject of growing practitioner attention which means that the focus on corruption is beginning to move significantly from theory to practice and the practical. While there is substance to the belief that fire-engines cannot be designed without a thorough understanding of the fire they are intended to put out, there is also a sense in which the pervasiveness and tenacity of the current fires of corruption are such that action rather than refining theories and processes is what is now required. To paraphrase an analogy made by a senior British civil servant about the general issue of identifying policy — that corruption “is rather like the elephant — you recognise it when you see it but cannot easily define it” (quoted in Hill, 1997, p. 6) — is also to suggest that, while theorising may help draw up longer-term approaches to dealing with corruption, there is enough information and experience to develop best practice proposals for more immediate implementation and for developmental strategies that link to the longer-term approaches. This article addresses some of the issues of this agenda which seeks to develop, for those actively involved in anti-corruption initiatives, frameworks within which to consider realisable and cost-effective shorter-term anti-corruption strategies. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The battle over global drug markets: enforcement of pharmaceutical patents in the United States, Europe and Japan

Legal context: Pharmaceutical patent litigation is on the rise. The focal pointof this increasingly contentious area of litigation is the surgein pharmaceutical patent challenges mounted by generic drugmanufacturers. Pharmaceutical companies need to identify viableenforcement strategies that can survive these challenges andeffectively manage the life cycle of their pharmaceutical productsaround the world. Key points: The degree to which pharmaceutical companies can capitalizeupon the value of their second generation patents to extendthe protection given to existing drug products depends in parton the patent landscape, country by country, and also on theregulatory landscape for generic drug products and their entryinto the marketplace.This paper will examine the patent laws,drug approval regulations, and court decisions on the validityand enforceability of later stage or second generation patentsdirected to combination compounds, selection inventions, andnew indications, in three major jurisdictions: The United States,Europe/UK, and Japan. Practical significance: Successful pharmaceutical companies can maintain a competitiveadvantage in the global pharmaceutical industry by evaluatingand strengthening the way existing drug products are protectedand, in many cases, changing the nature of protection underthe patent laws by improving upon the pharmaceutical productitself.     

从权利到工具:失效专利管理研究

失效专利是法律效力的丧失而非价值的丧失,通过价值评估及专利挖掘后完全可以将失去法律保护的这项权利转化为有力的工具,对失效专利进行事后管理可挖掘其剩余价值,促进产业进步。本文从失效专利的概念界定、失效原因及管理的必要性三方面出发,系统梳理和总结了学界关于失效专利管理的相关研究文献。研究发现,失效专利的管理主要围绕专利价值评估、专利申请与审查制度等因素展开。但当前研究在界定失效专利的定义及范围上并不统一,未形成明确的专利价值评估体系,也缺乏针对其管理的必要性分析。鉴于此,对失效专利进行管理需遵从以下路径:首先要厘清失效专利的定义并分析其失效原因,其次要总结失效专利管理的必要性及专利失效规律,最后从失效专利原权利人、相关市场企业以及政府部门等多主体视角出发提出管理对策,使失效专利管理秩序化、科学化。     

The software patent debate

Legal context. This article has practical application for thoseworking in the patent field, particularly with regards to thefiling of software patent applications. Key points. The article provides a detailed explanation of thestate of the art with regards to the legal protection of software,and describes the latest legal developments in the area, includingthe failed Directive on Computer Implemented Inventions andsome recent cases that may shed more light on some of the technicalissues involved in the area of software. The paper also exploressome of the arguments put forward by those in favour and opposedto software patents, in order to ascertain their validity. Practical significance. Existing case law may provide help tosolve the problem of patentability, but it might also be a goodidea to resurrect the idea that there should be a sui-generissoftware right.