From Around the Blogs

1.  In December 2021, the UKIPO published a call for views "to gather evidence on whether the ecosystem around SEPs is functioning efficiently and effectively and strikes the right balance for all entities involved."  In March 2023, it published a supplementary questionnaire "aimed at small and mid-cap businesses that are involved in standardisation and licensing of SEPs."  It has now published summaries of the responses to both calls, which are available here.  The responses show, perhaps not surprisingly, a considerable division of views on issues such as how well the system is currently working, whether holdup or holdout is more of a problem, the need for greater essentiality checking and for greater transparency, etc.  For now, the UKIPO itself is not expressing any views; rather, it states, “Given the breadth of issues raised and the divergence of the views on whether there is a case for government intervention, the IPO has decided that it will require a further period to assess the issues and, as appropriate, consider the merits of the proposals submitted.”  The summaries are themselves summarized in commentaries on IPKat, IP Watchdog, and JUVE Patent.

2. On IPKat, Henry P. Yang published Unpacking IDC v Lenovo (Part I): The approach on unpacking and comparing prior licence agreements.  As the title suggests, a second installment is contemplated.  Meanwhile, Florian Mueller published a post titled Mr Justice Mellor declares Lenovo the overall winner of FRAND dispute with InterDigital, awards fee-shifting but InterDigital is awarded interest of $46 million.  For my thoughts on the decision, see here.

3.  There has been some discussion of a bill, the Advancing America's Interests Act, pending in the U.S. House of Representatives that would tighten the requirements for nonpracticing entities to seek relief from the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), by inter alia limiting the ability of licensing companies to claim that they are “domestic industries” unless they actually transfer technology.  Seems like an excellent idea to me, to prevent NPEs from circumventing eBay.  For discussion on Patently-O and Bloomberg Law, see here and here.

4.  On Sufficient Description, Norman Siebrasse published a post titled Misleading the Court as a Basis for Punitive Damages, discussing a recent decision of Canada’s Federal Court awarding punitive damages in the amount of $200,000 (on top of lost profits damages of $150,000)

5.  Also on IPKat, Anna Maria Stein published Non-infringement declaration for alleged design infringement in Germany:  not in Italy, says Italian Supreme Court, discussing an Italian Supreme Court decision concluding, on the basis of the Brussels Regulation (Recast), that Italy lacked jurisdiction where the allegedly infringing goods were made in Italy but sold in Germany, and the German patent owner sent a warning letter to the German seller.