Contact
blog
IP2Innovate

IP2Innovate welcomes Draghi’s call to improve the pipeline from innovation to commercialization

IP2Innovate welcomes the report on EU competitiveness by Mario Draghi published yesterday, and in particular its emphasis on improving innovation.

The in-depth report cements competitiveness and boosting European productivity at the heart of the EU’s political agenda. It calls for Europe to improve the pipeline from innovation to commercialisation.

IP2Innovate fully agrees. One way to do that is to address the lack of proportionality considerations in patent litigation in European patent courts. Instead of granting remedies on the basis of a proportionality assessment, the default, automatic remedy is an injunction, even when the patent involves only a minor feature of a complex product.

This makes it far too easy for opportunistic patent assertion entities (PAEs) to sue productive businesses. It’s very profitable to PAEs but does nothing for the innovation process except penalise innovators and clog it up. This funnels money away from the development of new products in Europe, instead going to pay outsized legal settlements that often go far beyond what the PAE’s patent is worth.

Last year the European Commission launched a study to look at whether proportionality is being applied in Europe as well as looking into the presence and impact of PAEs in Europe.

In spring this year IP2Innovate called for the Commission to adjust the IP Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) in order to ensure proportionality is applied in an effective and meaningful way.

“With this new impetus from Mr Draghi we hope the European Commission will adapt the IPRED with targeted revisions that make proportionality the norm,” said Patrick Oliver, executive director of IP2Innovate.

A key aim of the Draghi report is to address issues that are holding back European competitiveness and productivity. Europe lags its key trading partners in both respects.

The US has addressed the patents issue through a Supreme Court ruling in the 2006 eBay Vs MercExchange case, which made sure courts evaluated the facts of a case before issuing a remedy. As a result it is no longer automatic for a PAE to win an injunction from a judge in the US.

“The same needs to happen in Europe. More balance in the patent system is needed to increase innovation and the take up of new technologies necessary to narrow the productivity gap between Europe and its trading partners,” Mr Oliver said.

Share

Other blogs

IP2Innovate

Professor Ohly’s two passions: patent law and clarinet

Professor Ansgar Ohly is one of Germany’s most respected law professors and an authority on intellectual property law across Europe. He is the Chair for Civil Law, Intellectual Property and Competition Law at the University of Munich. He is also a visiting professor at Oxford University.
IP2Innovate

Prof. Sikorski’s latest paper: IPRED needs targeted reforms to strengthen the principle of proportionality in patent litigation

There is broad agreement on the need for taking proportionality considerations into account in patent litigation cases but it’s not being applied in the courts in Europe. As a result, injunctions are being handed out automatically in almost all cases, even though EU legislation – the IP Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) – specifically calls for judges to apply proportionality. IPRED needs targeted amendments in order to correct this. In his paper titled Permanent Injunctions and the Reception of the Principle of Proportionality in the European Union, Rafal Sikorski, assistant professor, Chair of European Law at the Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan in Poland, calls for reform of the directive. “The EU should consider introducing a set of factors to IPRED that the courts should consider when applying proportionality. In fact, this approach has already been taken by the EU legislator in the Trade Secrets Directive,” Professor Sikorski said in an interview.
IP2Innovate

Prof. Alain Strowel: IP law professor with a grounding in philosophy

Professor Alain Strowel’s academic curiosity was first sparked by philosophy. At 18 he went to the universities he would later work for as a law professor, the Université Saint-Louis in Brussels and the UCLouvain.
 Back to overview

Subscribe to our newsletter

Privacy policy

© IP2Innovate 2024 - Website door Two Impress