EU-China Workshop on the Chinese Patent Law 24./25.09.2008 Topic II: Co-owned rights Prof. Dr. Christian Osterrieth www.rokh-ip.com.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cluster Meeting, 9 th February 2006 Legal issues in Open Source Software (OSS) Dr Zoe Kardasiadou (CIEEL)
Advertisements

AILA 2013 Sydney 18 September 2013, 11h30 – 13h30 Dolton House Jones, Sydney Parkview Room 3 Prof. Dr. Robert Koch LL.M. (McGill), Institute of Insurance.
Medicare Advantage Plans. What are Medicare Advantage Plans? 1. Required by law to provide their members the same or greater coverage as regular Medicare.
Bankruptcy of the purchaser and enforceability of retention of title vis-à-vis its receivership International Insolvency Law Conference Nottingham Law.
Patent Enforcement in Germany Pros and Cons by Alexander Harguth Attorney at law Patent- und Rechtsanwälte Alexander Harguth - Attorney at law - Galileiplatz.
BAILMENT AND PLEDGE.
The Ownership Dilemma Ownership of intellectual property –considered by investors –sought by companies seeking to exploit the intellectual property –sought.
Dannemann.com.br COMPENSATION TO MASTER FRANCHISORS UPON TERMINATION AND NON-RENEWAL OF MASTER FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS IN BRAZIL © 2012 Dannemann Siemsen.
September 14, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December.
Liability and Procedure in European Antitrust Law The EU Damages Directive Does the European Union overstep the mark again?
AIPLA Annual Meeting 2014 Bifurcation before the UPC Dr. Jochen Pagenberg Attorney-at-law, Munich/Paris Past President EPLAW Prinzregentenplatz
1 Support for the coherent development of policies This document is purely provisional, and only reflects preliminary options from Commission services.
1 Remedies for True Owner of Right to Obtain Patent against Usurped Patent AIPLA MWI IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Sunday, January 22, 2012.
European Contract Law Part I Laura M. Franciosi Fall Semester – a.y
EU: Bilateral Agreements of Member States
EU: Bilateral Agreements of Member States. Formerly concluded international agreements of Member States with third countries Article 351 TFEU The rights.
European Contract Law Part I Laura M. Franciosi Fall Semester – a.y
European payment order Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment.
14 The Law of Negligence and Liability for Negligent Professional Advice © Oxford University Press, All rights reserved.
LUMSA – International Commercial Law November 21, 2014 Prof. Avv. Roberto Pirozzi
5 August 2003Makoto Endo ATRIP Session 41 New Japanese Rules regarding Parallel Importation of Trademarked Goods (ATRIP, 5 August 2003, Session 4) Makoto.
European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims JUDr. Radka Chlebcová.
Revenue Enforcement Legal Strategies Lawrence K. Nodine Ballard Spahr December 16, 2009.
Generic ACCA slide. Auditor liability – international developments Opening title slide. Highlight and overwrite dummy title. Restrict yourself to a maximum.
The Brussels I Regulation Jurisdiction in matters of insurance, consumers contracts and individual contracts of employment.
July 18, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December 10,
Volkmar Henke, Slide 1 AIPPI Forum & ExCo 2011 Workshop V Inventorship for multinational inventions involving IP issues resulting from outsourcing The.
© 2004 VOSSIUS & PARTNER Opposition in the Procedural System by Dr. Johann Pitz AIPPI Hungary, June 2 – 4, 2004 Kecskemét.
DOMESTICATION OF TRIPS FLEXIBILITIES IN NATIONAL IP LEGISLATION FOR STRENGTHENING ACCESS TO MEDICINES IN ZAMBIA PROPOSED PATENT BILL AND ITS RELEVANCY.
New Sections 102 & 103 (b) Conditions for Patentability- (1) IN GENERAL- Section 102 of title 35, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: -`Sec.
Chapter 12 Contract Discharge and Remedies for Breach.
Forms of Business and Formation of Partnerships Chapter 37.
© 2004 The IPR-Helpdesk is a project of the European Commission DG Enterprise, co-financed within the fifth framework programme of the European Community.
Intellectual Property Rights Economy and Ownership of Results in IST Projects The Research Council of Norway Niels Peter Thorshaug.
Supreme Court Decision on Enforceability of a US Court Decision Dr. Shoichi Okuyama AIPPI Japan AIPLA Pre-meeting on October 22, 2014.
G ROUP INTEREST IN S ERBIA Attila Dudás, Ph.D. Assistant Professor University of Novi Sad Faculty of Law.
Law in the Global Marketplace: Intellectual Property and Related Issues Hosted by: Update on U.S. Patent Legislation.
 Reconsideration of the Employee Inventions System in Japan Pre-Meeting AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute January 27, 2015 Orlando Sumiko Kobayashi 1.
Employee Inventions in Germany Dr. Udo Meyer BASF Aktiengesellschaft, Germany On behalf of UNICE (Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederation of Europe)
Building Industry Authority Determination 2003/3 Commentary Paul Clements.
Change Orders, Extras and Claims Presented by Geoffrey Cantello, City of Ottawa.
Voidable Contracts Voidable contract: A contract which can be put to an end at the option of one party to the contract is a voidable contract. If the consent.
European enforcement order for uncontested claims Regulation n. 805/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of April
ESSENTIALS OF CZECH COMPANY LAW 1 Business Companies General definition Association of several persons (individual or legal entities) Created by agreement.
INTRODUCTION TO CZECH BUSINESS LAW 1 Time & Location Thursday10-12 a.m. Grading – criteria Participation in lectures - 50% Presentations Discussion Test.
Compulsory Patent Licence in German Law with focus on the Antitrust Compulsory Licence Defence EU-China IPR2 Project Conference on intellectual property.
Intellectual Property and Public Policy: Application of Flexibilities in the International IP and Trade system --Limitation and Exceptions for Education.
Turkish private international law on matrimonial property and successions Zeynep Derya TARMAN Koç Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi
EU-China Workshop on the Chinese Patent Law 24/25 September 2008 Topic IV: Legal Consequences of Invalidity of a Patent Prof. Dr. Christian Osterrieth.
Generally the law does NOT intervene into marital and family life UNLESS there has been a breach of law In family law matters this only USUALLY occurs.
Chapter 5 Maritime Lien. 一、 Definition of maritime liens(ML) : CMC Art. 21 A maritime lien is the right of the claimant, subject to the provisions of.
Legal Foundations of European Union Law II Tutorials Karima Amellal.
Litigation for Patent Infringement Prof. Dr. Christian Osterrieth China 25 September 2008.
Tues. Feb. 16. pleading and proving foreign law Fact approach to content of foreign law.
Article 4 [Obligations of Applicant] 4.1. As a sole and exclusive owner of the Application, Applicant warrants that.
UNIVERSITY OF LUSAKA FACULTY OF LAW
Legislations.
The Protection of Confidential Commercial or Industrial Information in Environmental Law: Analysis and Call for a Graded Concept of Protection Prof. Dr.
Private International Law Sciences Po Paris Spring 2017
Business Companies General definition
Agency, distributorship and franchising contracts in the United Arab Emirates IDI Annual Meeting, 13 June 2009, Barcelona
Business Companies General definition
Performance of Contract
Legal Environment for Business in Nepal 19 March 2017
LEGAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS
Implications of Employee and Collaborator Inventions
THIRD WORKER CATEGORY-economically dependant persons in Slovenia
Termination of Contract
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law,
SUBROGATION Meora Teitler.
Presentation transcript:

EU-China Workshop on the Chinese Patent Law 24./ Topic II: Co-owned rights Prof. Dr. Christian Osterrieth

2 2 Overview I.Emergence of co-owned rights under German Law II.Statutory provisions regulating co-ownership III.Influence on licensing co-owned rights IV.Influence on enforcement of co-owned rights V.Way out: Contractual arrangements

I. Emergence of co-owned rights under German Law Original co-ownership according to § 6, 2nd sentence German Patent Act (PatG): –“If more than one person have jointly made an invention, the right to the patent shall belong to them jointly.” –i.e. Co-invention leads to co-ownership especially Co-inventions because of R&D-Projects Subsequent co-ownership because of a joint acquisition of a patent by more than one party

II. Statutory provisions regulating co-ownership General principle: The relationship between co-owners of a patent is governed by the contractual provisions between these parties Lacking such contractual relationship the co-ownership is deemed as a so-called co-ownership at fractions (Gemeinschaft nach Bruchteilen) in according with Sec.741 et seqq. German Civil Code (BGB) – every co-owner is in principle entitled to make full use of the patented invention (see Sec. 743 (2) BGB), without an obligation to compensate (e.g. royalties) the other co-owners (cf. Federal Supreme Court, X ZR 152/03 = GRUR 2005, 663 – Gummielastische Masse II)

II. Statutory provisions regulating co-ownership cont’d the Federal Supreme Court thereby ruled against a longstanding prevailing different opinion allowing compensations to the other co- owners however, even under the new case law every co-owner is allowed to claim a reasonable use balancing the interests of all co-owners (Sec. 745 (2) BGB) and upon such a request compensation might be justified – the new case law therefore did not change the general rule but only imposed a formal requirement by insisting on an explicit request for compensation of the co-owner furthermore, according to Sec. 743 (2) BGB the use of one co- owner must not be excessive in way precluding the other co-owners from their use of the patent – whether there are situations in which this rule could apply is debated –every co-owner is entitled to assign its fraction on the co- ownership to a third party, but not to assign the patent as such (Sec. 747 BGB)

6 III. Influence on licensing co-owned rights Because every co-owner is only entitled to its own fraction but not to the patent as such, licensing of the patent depends on the consent of all co-owners –this principle applies to all kinds of licenses, i.e. it does not matter whether “only” a non- exclusive license is to be granted or an exclusive one

III. Influence on licensing co-owned rights cont’d –in cases of non-agreement between the co-owners there are only three possibilities to handle this situation 1.maintaining the status quo, i.e. no licensing at all 2.assigning the fraction to the third party (cf. above) = the assigning co-owner will loose its right to use to the third party that becomes the new member of the co-ownership at fractions 3.Termination of the co-ownership at fractions which would lead to an auction of the patent whereby the revenue will be divided between the former co-owners (Sec. 753 BGB) = every co-owner will loose its right to use, assumed that it does prevail in the auction

8 IV. Influence on enforcement of co-owned rights Every single co-owner has an own standing to sue, i.e. every single co-owner is entitled to enforce the patent (Sec BGB) -it is not necessary that all co-owners consent on the enforcement, which means that a co-owner who does not agree with the enforcement has no direct means to stop proceedings initated by another co-owner One indirect possibility could again be Sec. 745 (2) BGB granting the right to claim a reasonable use balancing the interests of all co-owners (cf. above); however - if at all - this would only work in extremely rare cases because the interests of the suing co-owner would have to be considered as well

IV. Influence on enforcement of co-owned rights cont’d -the acting co-owner has to claim the rights for the benefit of the co-ownership at fractions, e.g. it is not allowed to claim payment in the own name Every single co-owner is entitled to defend the patent in nullity proceedings (Sec. 744 (2) BGB) -nevertheless, the nullity action has to be directed against all co-owners, it is not sufficient to sue only one

V. Way out: Contractual arrangements The statutory regime leads to many problems in either way, therefore in practice the conclusion of contracts between the co-owners regulating their relationship with respect to the co-owned patent prevail However, in cases of patents for the same invention in many different countries even the contractual solution raises difficult questions, especially regarding the governing law and the admissibility of certain terms