« IT - Meda Pharma v. Alfa Wassermann | Main | EU - Unitary Patent / A-G proposes that Spain’s actions against the regulations forming part of the unitary patent package be dismissed »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

From my point of view, the outcome is not surprising at all. Patents are in much more cases held valid, that this report suggests.

But being more tha a "paper tiger" doesn't require in any case a decision of the courts.

If someone pays royalties for the use of a patent, one may assume that he - at least on a superficial basis - assessed the validity of the patent. Paying royalties for a patent without challenging its validity, means nothing else than that the patent is valid and respected. A case that happens very often and all the time.

Next example: In a situation where s.o. is sued for patent infringement, he will carefully assess the chances of the possible outcome of a nullity proceeding. This is even more true when you take into account that the court fees in nullity proceedings as well as the reimbursable lawyer's and patent attorneys fees are very high. So: Every person filing a nullity suit has carefully assessed the situation and has come to the conclusion that there are high chances to invalidate this very patent. Otherwise he wouldn't not initiate costly nullity proceedings.

Having this in mind, the figures shown in the report are not surprising at all. They reflect that German lawyers and patent attorneys do in a propper manner their job. Not more, not less. German patents and/or the German part of a European Bundle Patent are far more than paper tigers.

The comments to this entry are closed.


EPLAW Patent Blog sponsors:

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner