ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Unified Patent Court"

(External links: * [http://www.unitary-patent.eu/ www.Unitary-Patent.eu])
(improve wording)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{navbox}}
 
{{navbox}}
The '''unitary patent''' is an EU proposal which involves creating a new, pro-patent court which would deal with patent litigation instead of the national courts.  The proposal also involves creating a single patent which would be valid in many EU member states, without translation.  This proposal takes over from the '''Community Patent''', which since the Lisbon Treaty is sometimes called the '''EU Patent'''.<ref>http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1714&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.premiercercle.com/sites/ip2010/overview.php|title=Brussels event about patents|quote=The Community Patent, now renamed EU Patent, has made too little progress}}</ref>
+
The '''unitary patent''' ('''Unipat''') is an EU proposal which involves creating a new, pro-patent court which would deal with patent litigation instead of the national courts.  The proposal also involves creating a single patent which would be valid in many EU member states, without translation.  This proposal takes over from the '''Community Patent''', which since the Lisbon Treaty is sometimes called the '''EU Patent'''.<ref>http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1714&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.premiercercle.com/sites/ip2010/overview.php|title=Brussels event about patents|quote=The Community Patent, now renamed EU Patent, has made too little progress}}</ref>
  
 
The unitary patent is an attempt at [[unifying Europe's patent systems]], with all the usual dangers.
 
The unitary patent is an attempt at [[unifying Europe's patent systems]], with all the usual dangers.
Line 20: Line 20:
 
==Problem of incubating bad case law==
 
==Problem of incubating bad case law==
  
By creating a court full of patent lawyers, we know that this court will give a lot of rulings in favour of expanding patent law.  This is how software patents came into existence in the USA (via the creation of the [[CAFC]] in 1982).
+
By creating a court with [[patent lawyers]] as judges, this proposal will lead to a set of rulings in favour of expanding patent law (giving a "maximal" interpretation of the law).  This is how software patents came into existence in the USA via the creation of the [[CAFC]] in 1982.
  
 
Even if the European Court of Justice would have jurisdiction to review the new court's rulings, we might see the principle of [[settled expectations]] causing the European Court of Justice to follow the new court.
 
Even if the European Court of Justice would have jurisdiction to review the new court's rulings, we might see the principle of [[settled expectations]] causing the European Court of Justice to follow the new court.

Revision as of 20:30, 24 November 2011

The unitary patent (Unipat) is an EU proposal which involves creating a new, pro-patent court which would deal with patent litigation instead of the national courts. The proposal also involves creating a single patent which would be valid in many EU member states, without translation. This proposal takes over from the Community Patent, which since the Lisbon Treaty is sometimes called the EU Patent.[1][2]

The unitary patent is an attempt at unifying Europe's patent systems, with all the usual dangers.

Background: Community Patent (2000-2010)

The Community Patent was proposed by the European Commission in 2000 as "Rule of the Council" document number 2000/0177 (CNS), COM(2000)412 FR final.

On October 30th 2009, a new proposal was published: Axel Horns' overview.

Relation to the ECJ

According to European Commissioner Charlie McCreevy, May 18th 2006, the Community Patent would give the EU Court of Justice authority in interpreting the EPC:

an important feature of the proposed Community patent system is the accession of the Community to the EPC. By this, the convention becomes part of the Community acquis and subject to interpretation by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The ECJ is not bound by the case law developed by the EPO and is free in its interpretation of the provisions of the EPC[3]

Problem of incubating bad case law

By creating a court with patent lawyers as judges, this proposal will lead to a set of rulings in favour of expanding patent law (giving a "maximal" interpretation of the law). This is how software patents came into existence in the USA via the creation of the CAFC in 1982.

Even if the European Court of Justice would have jurisdiction to review the new court's rulings, we might see the principle of settled expectations causing the European Court of Justice to follow the new court.

Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

Background

References