1. Emma Flett and John Patten have published a short article titled Court of Appeal Furthers the UK's Bid to the SEPs Capital of Europe, 41 EIPR 385 (2019). Here is the abstract:
On 30 January 2019, the English Court of Appeal handed down judgment in Conversant Wireless Licensing Sàrl v Huawei Technologies, essentially reiterating its 2018 judgment in Unwired Planet v Huawei, that standard-essential patent (SEP) holders may, under certain circumstances, use the English courts to obtain a licence against would-be infringers on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms which covers the SEP-holders’ global SEP portfolio (although which only has binding applicability and enforceability in relation to UK SEPs). This latest decision develops the English courts’ position with regard to the issue of forum conveniens in UK patent infringement, invalidity and essentiality litigation, emphasising their willingness to accept jurisdiction to determine global FRAND rates and licence terms regardless of the magnitude of the nexus to the UK market.
As noted here, both of the cases referenced above are now pending before the U.K. Supreme Court.
2. Florian Mueller recently published a post titled Broadbased IoT industry support for CWA2 set of standard-essential patent (SEP) licensing guidelines and best practices, which links to two competing documents proposing differing approahces to SEP/FRAND matters: (1) CEN Workshop Agreement, CWA 95000, Core Principles andApproaches for Licensing of Standard Essential Patents 10 (June 2019), and (2)
CEN Workshop Agreement, CWA 17431, Principles and Guidance for Licensing StandardEssential Patents in 5G and the Internet of Things (IoT), Including theIndustrial Internet (June 2019).
3. IPKat published a post by Axel Ferrazzini on the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf's Unwired Planet v. Huawei decision, previously mentioned here.
4. Informally, I have heard that the discussion on whether to amend Germany's patent statute to allow more flexibility in regard to the granting of injunctions, held by the German Ministry for Justice and Consumer Protection on May 20 (see here and here), did not result in any consensus to make such an amendment, but I haven't seen any write-ups yet. If and when I do, I will pass them along.
Update: I just found this article on JUVE Patent discussing the May 20 meeting. According to the article, it is unlikely that Germany will get rid of automatic injunctions, but it may introduce some reforms, such as more frequent use of stays pending invalidation proceedings and stays pending design-around (the so-called "grace period," or in German Aufbrauchfrist).
Update: I just found this article on JUVE Patent discussing the May 20 meeting. According to the article, it is unlikely that Germany will get rid of automatic injunctions, but it may introduce some reforms, such as more frequent use of stays pending invalidation proceedings and stays pending design-around (the so-called "grace period," or in German Aufbrauchfrist).
No comments:
Post a Comment