Recent developments in the patentability of software in the UK

Over the past few months there has been renewed debate at the UK Intellectual Property Office (“UK IPO”) and in the UK courts over whether computer programs can be considered patentable inventions. In particular, concern persists that the UK authorities and the European Patent Office (“EPO”) are applying different tests for the patentability of computer software, even though they are applying the same legislation. This article reviews the positions taken by the UK and the EPO tribunals, and how these impact upon businesses wishing to patent inventions encompassed in software.     

For the health of the economy and patent system: rationale and scope of patent attorney privilege

Legal context: There exists, in some countries, a patent attorney privilege.This privilege allows an actual or potential holder of patentrights to withhold from a court communications that it has hadwith its patent attorney. The privilege is not recognized inall jurisdictions and there is variation in the extent of theprivilege in those countries where it does exist. Key points: This article explores the rationale for the privilege in orderto see if there is a sound basis upon which to found it. Througha consideration of the justifications for other legal privileges,the article finds that patent attorney privilege is a justifiableprotection for communications between clients and their patentattorneys. If there was a possibility that the communicationswould have to be revealed in court, this may impact the fulland frank nature of the communications. Such communicationsassist patent attorneys, as professionals with expertise ina specialized field, to provide clients with appropriate andeffective advice. That advice goes directly to the maintenanceand benefit of the patent system and the overall economy. Practical significance: As a result of the variation in the extent of the privilegearound the world, there are moves afoot to reform its operation.This article reveals strong public policy reasons for the recognitionof a patent attorney privilege. These grounds also reinforcethe need to ensure that privilege is not unduly limited in itsoperation in any jurisdiction.     

美国专利蟑螂的新近立法评析及其启示

专利蟑螂已经成为美国专利制度中一个十分严峻的问题,美国政府不断出台专利法修订草案和政策,意图遏制专利蟑螂,并取得了不错的成效。然而,从近期美国参众两院提交的诸项法案来看,尽管存在分歧,但其整体立场已经发生明显转变,倾向于优待专利蟑螂。由此,以设立双方复审程序、提高禁令颁发标准以及限制司法管辖为代表的诸多重要专利司法改革成果,都将可能遭到弱化。结合美国的经验教训,我国应当尽早认识专利蟑螂并着手应对,从考察开放许可专利实施情况、增加"权利人商业模式"作为判赔考量因素、细化司法管辖规则、完善专利无效制度以及构建全面打击专利假冒行为制度等多个维度,预防和遏制专利蟑螂。     

英国行政裁判所制度经验：对我国行政复议制度修改的思考

英国行政裁判所通过调整以适用英国社会、经济的发展变化,彰显行政裁判所的制度优势,特别是2007年《裁判所、法院和执行法》颁布后,英国行政裁判所在性质、组织、管辖、程序以及监督机关等方面具有更加突出的特点。英国行政裁判所经验对完善我国行政复议制度具有借鉴意义,行政复议法律制度修改需要适应我国社会、经济快速发展变化的需求,发挥行政复议制度优势,保障行政复议组织独立性和裁决公正性。     

Patent Cases in the Court of Chancery, 1714–58

The purpose of this article is two-fold. First, it discusses recent improvements in the cataloguing of Chancery bills and pleadings entered between 1714 and 1758, held in the C 11 series at the National Archives. This has made it much easier to locate cases by subject, and a methodology for doing this is described. Secondly, the article outlines the results of work carried out in C 11 on cases relating to patents for invention. Although there has been significant research into how other forms of intellectual property right were adjudicated in the Court of Chancery, notably copyright, patent law for this period remains obscure. The article shows that Chancery (along with the common law courts) retained the principal jurisdiction in patent law, rather than the Privy Council as was once thought.     

Arresting Developments? Restricting the Enforcement of the UK's Universal Jurisdiction Provisions

Recently introduced legislative amendments limit the issue of arrest warrants on the application of a private prosecutor where jurisdiction is based on universal jurisdiction. The amendments addressed a ‘loophole’ in English law whereby a private prosecutor could seek and be granted an arrest warrant, generally in respect of an individual on a short term visit to the UK, even though the consent of the Attorney General would be required for the prosecution to continue. This article argues that these amendments addressed legitimate evidentiary and diplomatic relations concerns, are consistent with the UK's international obligations, and are in line with the UK's policy on the exercise of universal jurisdiction and with international trends. However, given the limited category of persons who were subject to such arrest warrants under the previous law and the practice of the UK concerning special missions, the amendments may be of limited practical significance.     

Fog in the Gateway: Brownlie v Four Seasons Holdings Inc

In Brownlie v Four Seasons Holdings Inc, the UK Supreme Court for the first time addressed the meaning of ‘damage’ in the gateway for jurisdiction in tort cases under paragraph 3.1(9)(a) of Practice Direction 6B of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. The issue has proven controversial with a number of first instance decisions asserting an expansive jurisdiction in such cases, departing from the traditional approach. In the event the Court decided the case on other grounds, but the extensive discussion of the issue (on which the Court was divided 3‐2) illustrates the stark divergence of opinion on the proper scope of and approach to the English courts’ adjudicatory authority. This note criticises the views advanced by the majority for endorsing the more expansive interpretation on the grounds that it fails to take account of the legislative history and applies an incomplete conception of justice in justifying its position.     

涉外继承案件专属管辖考

涉外继承案件是否属于专属管辖范围,从我国《民事诉讼法》的规定看,答案似乎是肯定的,但理论上存有相当大的争议,且实践中,这样的理解也难以变成实际操作。纵观大陆法系德日法等国家立法,将涉外继承案件列入专属管辖范围实属罕见。就国内层面而言,专属管辖可以从法院职能角度和案件特殊性角度进行广义理解,但在国际层面,尤其涉及司法裁决域外承认与执行问题的时候,专属管辖范围的限制就尤为重要;因此,有关不动产物权、法人清算或破产、知识产权诉讼等专属某国法院管辖的观点和做法,日益成为各国普遍认可的事实。从这个角度来看,我们更应审视我国现有规定,从而为涉外继承寻找出合理的法律地位。     

Privacy,anonymity and liability: Will anonymous communicators have the last laugh?

In this paper, the author sets out the way in which the UK approach to privacy protection is able to extend its reach to anonymous postings. Whilst anonymity might sometimes be seen as one of the essential characteristics of communicating on-line, it does not provide an impenetrable veil of protection in respect of a privacy violation claim. Instead, there are avenues available to identify anonymous communicators, which have implications both for internet freedom and jurisdiction in cyberspace. In the UK, our common law has not denied bloggers, or other on-line contributors, anonymity per se. However, it will be argued that recent UK judgments represent a warning to anonymous communicators that they can be held liable for what they post on-line and that naivety is no defence at law. Whilst on-line platforms allow people to effectively become journalists; to become publishers, as familiar users, they should become more aware of the consequences of their on-line postings and appreciate that they will not be able to escape from the application of third party disclosure orders. However, as these are not without their problems, it is possible that anonymous communicators may have the last laugh.     

Soya thought your patent had been infringed?

This case highlights potential limitations of patents relatingto genetically transformed plants and animals, also providingsome comfort to patentees by confirming that there is no defenceto patent infringement in the UK by virtue of a sample containingonly a trace of potentially infringing material.     

论国际民商事诉讼管辖权的消极冲突

国际民商事诉讼中的管辖权消极冲突问题在学界鲜为人所重视。这种冲突与法律消极冲突既有着联系 ,也存在着区别。引起冲突的原因是多方面的 ,造成的后果也有所不同。在解决消极冲突的方式上 ,可以考虑制定“必要管辖法院”或“紧急管辖条款”、完善民事诉讼法的起诉制度 ,以及严格不方便法院原则。     

Defamation in cyberspace: A Japanese perspective

The aim of this paper is two-fold: first, to introduce how Japanese law and its jurisprudence have dealt with the case of on-line defamation, which is arguably one of the most acute problems in modern society, and second, to critically examine the efficacy of such an approach. The recent decision of the Supreme Court in on-line defamation (as oppose to off-line defamation) will be introduced as an exemplar of the way Japanese law and its jurisprudence have dealt with such an acute problem. A first step will be to provide, by way of background, a brief overview of how defamation in a conventional sense has been treated by the Japanese legal system. The second step will be to outline how the Japanese jurisdiction has dealt with on-line defamation, that is to say, to what extent the Japanese court regulates on-line defamatory comments made by the ordinary people. A third step will be to examine the efficacy of such an approach, and the final step will be to examine whether the UK court can learn a lesson from the Japanese jurisdiction. The author will draw upon Japanese jurisprudence, in order to consider whether a valuable lesson might be offered to the UK jurisdiction.     

德国法院体系探析

德国特色法院体系的形成与演变有其深刻的社会历史背景,首先是文化传统,其次是经济体制,第三是工人运动。德国的法院系统由宪法法院、普通法院和专门法院三类组成。宪法法院专门审理违宪案件;普通法院只审理刑事案件和民事案件;专门法院包括(普通)行政法院、财政法院、劳动法院、社会法院、专利法院、军事法院和惩戒法院等。除了(普通)法院和宪法法院具有独立地位外,其他法院均隶属于政府有关部门。德国行政审判权由各级行政法院与劳动法院、社会法院、财政法院等共同行使。专门法院的性质介于行政机关与司法机关之间,但行政机关的性质更多(本质上属于行政司法)。     

The Patents Court's streamlined litigation procedure--two years on

Legal and practical context. The streamlined procedure is asimplified patent litigation procedure that was introduced overtwo years ago in the English Patents Court and Patents CountyCourt. This article looks at the procedure, the way it has beenapplied since its introduction and the effect it has had onpatent litigation in the UK. Key points. The procedure was designed to deal with simple patentcases quickly and relatively cheaply. It is geared towards aone day trial taking place approximately eight months afterthe commencement of proceedings. Under the procedure there isno automatic disclosure, no experiments and cross-examinationis limited to permitted topics only. Although it was designedwith patents in mind, the procedure is available for all appropriateactions heard in the Patents Court and Patents County Court.It is only suitable, however, for relatively simple actionsin which complex findings of fact are not necessary. Conclusions. Not many actions have come to trial under thisprocedure, but its availability is nonetheless of great significanceto patent litigation in the UK. This is because it providesa new point of departure for directions in certain types ofaction and because its availability has increased access topatent litigation in the UK and has renewed interest in thePatents Court and Patents County Court as forums in which toissue patent proceedings.     

Jesting at scars that never felt a wound: The US Supreme Court's new doctrine of licensee standing without breach

Until recently, it was assumed that patent licensees in compliancewith terms of their licence agreements would lack ‘standing’to sue their licensors, but in MedImmune v Genentech, the SupremeCourt of the United States held that federal courts in the UShave jurisdiction over declaratory judgment actions by patentlicensees asserting the invalidity, unenforceability, or non-infringementof a licensed patent, even where the licensee is in full compliancewith the licence agreement.     

我国涉外民商事审判存在问题实证分析——以757份裁判文书为依据

我国法院在涉外民商事审判中尚存在诸多问题,大量涉外民商事案件的审理缺乏管辖权依据的阐述或对此语焉不详,甚或管辖权依据适用错误。在管辖权异议方面,仲裁协议与法院管辖、债权转让与原合同管辖权效力间的关系纠缠不清,异议不断。在准据法适用中,不但大量的裁判文书没有准据法选择依据,法律适用呈恣意态势,而且法院地法被大量适用、准据法选择方法较为单一等均引致相当弊端。对于其他国家或地区判决以及仲裁裁决的承认与执行方面的严重问题在于对承认与执行的法律依据阐述含糊不详。     

Northern Irish legal education after Brexit

ABSTRACT

In this article we argue that the impact of Brexit on the law schools in Northern Ireland is tied to the “unique circumstances” of legal education in this part of the world. Legal education in Northern Ireland is likely to develop to become even more distinctive than that in other parts of the UK. Although there are two distinct jurisdictions on the island, they are deeply entangled by shared history and geographical proximity that make cross-border practice a daily reality. These circumstances seem likely to drive the trajectory of the development of legal education in Northern Ireland. Indeed, EU law is likely to remain a component of the Northern Irish qualifying law degree. The potential for the development of law specific to Northern Ireland under backstop arrangements is another significant driver for the future orientation of legal education in this jurisdiction. Legal education in Northern Ireland is, therefore, likely to become noticeably more “European” than that in other parts of the UK.     

民事诉讼指定管辖立法规定的问题与完善

从大陆法系国家有关指定管辖的一般理论以及具体立法规定的角度上看,我国现行指定管辖立法存在重大缺陷,这些缺陷涉及指定管辖行为的性质、适用范围、运行程序以及当事人申请指定管辖的权利保障等问题。立法存在的问题主要源于指定管辖立法目的与价值追求上的偏差,立法观念与立法方式上的不足。立法规定存在的问题,一旦受到现实社会诸多不当因素对民事司法活动的影响,会在较大程度上造成指定管辖司法适用上的混乱。为此,需要立法在借鉴域外大陆法系国家有关指定管辖通行理论以及立法规定的基础上,明确指定管辖应有的目标与基本价值追求,矫正对于指定管辖性质及其立法观念问题的认识,以及对于指定管辖适用程序所涉及的诸多问题进行必要的修改、完善。     

Modern Families,Modern Family Justice: Supporting Family Relationships in Fast‐Changing Socio‐Political‐Economic Climates (Summary of the Report of the Consultation at St George's House,Windsor, February 12–13, 2018)

This summary relates to the consultation held at St George's House, in Windsor, England, on February 2018. The attendees came from across Europe and from the United States, and they discussed a range of initiatives designed to address the challenges in modern family justice and the changes in the social, political, and economic environments that are impacting family life across the globe. Although the challenges are very similar, the approach to resolving them varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The attendees concluded that there is much we can learn from each other, and that greater cooperation between family justice professionals across geographic boundaries would be highly beneficial.     

互联网环境下的国际民事管辖权

互联网对国际民事管辖权提出了挑战,必须研究新的确定管辖权的标准。滑动标尺法以被告通过互联网所从事的行为与法院地的密切程度来决定法院是否有管辖权;影响方法将行为产生的影响作为行使管辖权的标准;目标指向方法是前面两种方法的发展,更注重被告的互联网行为的明显指向和该行为对法院地造成后果的可预见性;欧洲的“消费者保护优先”模式将消费者的住所等作为管辖权标准。在互联网环境下,应以协议选择管辖原则、不方便法院原则和先受理法院原则协调管辖权冲突。我国现行立法存在缺陷,相关司法实践较少。就互联网环境下的国际民事管辖权,我国立法应严格限制专属管辖,禁止国籍管辖,允许当事人协议选择法院,参考目标指向方法和“消费者保护优先”模式确定我国的管辖标准。