Industriekoalition IP2Innovate fordert Patentrechtsreform zur Förderung von Innovation in Deutschland

IP2Innovate

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

BRUSSELS, 12 February 2025 - IP2Innovate's statement on the Commission's intention to withdraw the SEP Regulation IP2Innovate expresses deep concern over the European Commission's intention to withdraw the Standards Essential Patents (SEP) Regulation. This last-minute decision would represent a significant setback for Europe's innovation ecosystem, including for a large number of European SMEs, and sends a troubling signal to innovative businesses that rely on predictable and fair SEP licensing frameworks. The Commission’s justification for withdrawing the proposal, citing the absence of a “foreseeable agreement,” is misleading. The European Parliament has adopted a negotiating position with an overwhelming majority. On the Council's side, several working group meetings have already been scheduled, including one for February 27, which would have allowed further discussion on this important issue. The current patent system in Europe urgently needs modernisation to bolster the region's competitiveness and innovation capacity. The lack of transparency and fairness in SEP licensing, combined with the absence of the application of proportionality to patent infringement cases, continues to impede innovation and ultimately diminishes the benefits of interoperability for European consumers. We strongly urge the Member States and European Parliament to reject this proposal for withdrawal and demonstrate their commitment to progressing this vital file. Looking ahead, we call upon the Commission to modernise the existing patent framework that applies to both SEPs and non-SEPs alike. This should include targeted amendments to the IPR Enforcement Directive, particularly concerning remedies for patent infringements. Such reforms are essential to strengthen Europe's competitive position in the global innovation landscape.

IP2Innovate

Decades old framework harms competitiveness. Modernising EU’s patent system will be key to EU’s ability to innovate, compete and grow. ​​​Two decades is a long time to lag behind. But that’s how long the European Commission’s Competitiveness Compass tells us the EU has been trailing ​other major economies​. Why? ​​​​Part of the problem is that the system holding Europe back sits on decades old framework. The application of the IPR Enforcement Directive (IPRED), created before today's tech revolution, results in the heavy-handed enforcement over patents which damages innovation. The Compass recognises that to compete, Europe must be able to lead in critical technologies like AI, robotics, biotechnology, and clean energy – all sectors characterized by complex products incorporating thousands of patented technologies. Yet the current application of the IPRED does not cater for complex products. Currently, European patent courts nearly always grant automatic injunctions in patent infringement cases, even if the manufacturer of a complex product has accidentally infringed a patent reading on a minor component of that product. This means companies have to take entire product ranges off the market or pay excessively high settlements, with costs rising into the hundreds of millions. This is impacting investment decisions and​​​ diverting resources from key technology areas​​​​​, and what’s more, it​’​s enriching an ecosystem of ​​​investors​ that buy up ​trivial​ patents specifically to benefit from the imbalanced system. After 20 years, this outdated framework needs updating to ensure remedies for infringement are proportionate, and abusive patent litigation doesn’t hinder innovation and competitiveness. The United States ​​​made this adjustment almost twenty years ago​. The 2006 eBay v. MercExchange US Supreme Court decision required courts to evaluate the facts of each case before issuing injunctions. This balanced approach has​​​ put a stop to automatic injunctions​ while protecting legitimate patent rights. As Europe aims to close its productivity gap and lead in critical technologies, modernising IPRED is key. A more balanced patent system would support Europe's innovative capacity in the exciting and complex technologies that will drive future growth, and help bridge the competitiveness gap. The Compass states the EU needs to close the innovation gap and simplify rules to leverage the benefits of the Single Market. Otherwise, it will “will lose relevance” in a world characterised by strength of the “big powers”.