Patentability of Plants: At the Crossroads between Monopolizing Nature and Protecting Technological Innovation? external link

The Journal of World Intellectual Property, num: 3-4, pp: 105-149, 2014

Abstract

This article provides an in-depth critical analysis of pressing issues regarding the patentability of plants. There is no public interest overarching principle present in the European Patent Convention or any other convention for that matter which would exclude patent protection for plants. The expansionist behavior of some users of the patent system seeking to obtain patent protection for methods and products which are very akin to traditional breeding methods needs to be halted and patent applications in that context deserve very close scrutiny so as to avoid that the border is crossed. Patents for hybrid seeds ought not to be protected by patents, as they in effect protect plant varieties as such. If the patent system is not capable of keeping such innovations outside of the patent territory, the call for excluding all plant-related innovations from patentability will become more influential. Products produced by essentially biological processes should not be patentable. However, in the absence of a statutory basis, the current legal framework does not allow the judiciary to come to such conclusion. The EPC needs to be amended in this respect. Finally, introducing a breeders’ exemption in the patent system could jeopardize the internal and external architecture of the patent system and one should be wary of introducing it.

breeders' exemption, breeding methods, Industrial property, Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht, Patent law, plants

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Patentability of Plants: At the Crossroads between Monopolizing Nature and Protecting Technological Innovation?}, author = {Bostyn, S.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1401.pdf}, year = {0826}, date = {2014-08-26}, journal = {The Journal of World Intellectual Property}, number = {3-4}, abstract = {This article provides an in-depth critical analysis of pressing issues regarding the patentability of plants. There is no public interest overarching principle present in the European Patent Convention or any other convention for that matter which would exclude patent protection for plants. The expansionist behavior of some users of the patent system seeking to obtain patent protection for methods and products which are very akin to traditional breeding methods needs to be halted and patent applications in that context deserve very close scrutiny so as to avoid that the border is crossed. Patents for hybrid seeds ought not to be protected by patents, as they in effect protect plant varieties as such. If the patent system is not capable of keeping such innovations outside of the patent territory, the call for excluding all plant-related innovations from patentability will become more influential. Products produced by essentially biological processes should not be patentable. However, in the absence of a statutory basis, the current legal framework does not allow the judiciary to come to such conclusion. The EPC needs to be amended in this respect. Finally, introducing a breeders’ exemption in the patent system could jeopardize the internal and external architecture of the patent system and one should be wary of introducing it.}, keywords = {breeders' exemption, breeding methods, Industrial property, Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht, Patent law, plants}, }

Finding Vredo: The Dutch Supreme Court Decision on Escitalopram external link

Berichten Industriële Eigendom, num: 2, pp: 41-45, 2014

Abstract

This article is about the pharma patent litigation sparked by Lundbeck's blockbuster drug for 'escitalopram', a drug used for treating depression and generalized anxiety disorder. The key theme is about whether patents can also protect novel substances that can be fully envisaged but cannot yet be made. The decision of the Supreme Court is compared with earlier decisions in Germany and the United Kingdom. The author criticizes the lack of explanation provided by the Supreme Court.

Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Finding Vredo: The Dutch Supreme Court Decision on Escitalopram}, author = {Tsoutsanis, A.}, url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2451438}, year = {0718}, date = {2014-07-18}, journal = {Berichten Industriële Eigendom}, number = {2}, abstract = {This article is about the pharma patent litigation sparked by Lundbeck's blockbuster drug for 'escitalopram', a drug used for treating depression and generalized anxiety disorder. The key theme is about whether patents can also protect novel substances that can be fully envisaged but cannot yet be made. The decision of the Supreme Court is compared with earlier decisions in Germany and the United Kingdom. The author criticizes the lack of explanation provided by the Supreme Court.}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht}, }

Trade mark applications in bad faith: righting wrong in Denmark and why the Benelux is next external link

Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, num: 2, pp: 118-122, 2014

Industriële eigendom, Merkenrecht

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Trade mark applications in bad faith: righting wrong in Denmark and why the Benelux is next}, author = {Tsoutsanis, A.}, url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2396180}, year = {0328}, date = {2014-03-28}, journal = {Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice}, number = {2}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Merkenrecht}, }

Merkenopposities in de Benelux external link

pp: 270-283, 2014

Abstract

In dit deel uit de bekende Tekst & Commentaar serie gaat de auteur in detail in op de merkenoppositie in de Benelux. Hoe instellen, waar indienen en op welke juridische basis, zijn bijvoorbeeld een aantal vragen die in dit deel aan de orde komen. Het commentaar volgt de wettelijke structuur van het Benelux Verdrag inzake de Intellectuele Eigendom. Naast de Benelux oppositie vergelijkt de auteur ook andere deelterreinen: nietigheidsprocedure bij de overheidsrechter op (dezelfde) relatieve gronden, opposities tegen Internationale Merkaanvragen en de OHIM oppositie procedure.

Industriële eigendom, Merkenrecht

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Merkenopposities in de Benelux}, author = {Tsoutsanis, A.}, url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2336671}, year = {0109}, date = {2014-01-09}, abstract = {In dit deel uit de bekende Tekst & Commentaar serie gaat de auteur in detail in op de merkenoppositie in de Benelux. Hoe instellen, waar indienen en op welke juridische basis, zijn bijvoorbeeld een aantal vragen die in dit deel aan de orde komen. Het commentaar volgt de wettelijke structuur van het Benelux Verdrag inzake de Intellectuele Eigendom. Naast de Benelux oppositie vergelijkt de auteur ook andere deelterreinen: nietigheidsprocedure bij de overheidsrechter op (dezelfde) relatieve gronden, opposities tegen Internationale Merkaanvragen en de OHIM oppositie procedure.}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Merkenrecht}, }

Comparison of Patent Claim Construction between Netherlands and Germany on Basis of AGA v. Occlutech external link

World Intellectual Property Report, num: 6, pp: 32-34, 2013

Abstract

This article provides a brief overview on how the Dutch and German courts interpret the claims of a patent. It briefly compares each national approach on the basis of the recent AGA v Occlutech litigation in both countries. The dispute between AGA and Occlutech involved socalled ‘‘occluders’’, a collapsible medical device for closing defects in the septum wall of the heart through cardiac catheterisation. Items discussed are: claim construction and judicial balancing under the new "Protocol for the Interpretation of Art. 69 of the European Patent Convention", equivalence, pioneer inventions and file wrapper estoppel.

Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Comparison of Patent Claim Construction between Netherlands and Germany on Basis of AGA v. Occlutech}, author = {Tsoutsanis, A.}, url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2262859}, year = {0627}, date = {2013-06-27}, journal = {World Intellectual Property Report}, number = {6}, abstract = {This article provides a brief overview on how the Dutch and German courts interpret the claims of a patent. It briefly compares each national approach on the basis of the recent AGA v Occlutech litigation in both countries. The dispute between AGA and Occlutech involved socalled ‘‘occluders’’, a collapsible medical device for closing defects in the septum wall of the heart through cardiac catheterisation. Items discussed are: claim construction and judicial balancing under the new "Protocol for the Interpretation of Art. 69 of the European Patent Convention", equivalence, pioneer inventions and file wrapper estoppel.}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht}, }

Enabling biotechnological inventions in Europe and the United States: a study of the patentability of proteins and DNA sequences with special emphasis on the disclosure requirement external link

2005

Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {Enabling biotechnological inventions in Europe and the United States: a study of the patentability of proteins and DNA sequences with special emphasis on the disclosure requirement}, author = {Bostyn, S.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/996.pdf}, year = {0127}, date = {2005-01-27}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht}, }

Patenting DNA sequences (polynucletides) and scope of protection in the European Union: an evaluation external link

pp: 162, 2005

Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {Patenting DNA sequences (polynucletides) and scope of protection in the European Union: an evaluation}, author = {Bostyn, S.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/patentingdna.pdf}, year = {0127}, date = {2005-01-27}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht}, }

No Contact with the Human Body, Please! Patentability of Diagnostic Method Inventions after G01/04 external link

European Intellectual Property Review, num: 6, pp: 238-244, 2007

Abstract

When the referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) was made in respect of diagnostic method inventions, high expectations were present that the decision would bring an end to existing confusion and legal uncertainty with regard to diagnostic method patent applications. As will be seen further in this comment, the EBA had not entirely delivered.

Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {No Contact with the Human Body, Please! Patentability of Diagnostic Method Inventions after G01/04}, author = {Bostyn, S.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/993.pdf}, year = {0809}, date = {2007-08-09}, journal = {European Intellectual Property Review}, number = {6}, abstract = {When the referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) was made in respect of diagnostic method inventions, high expectations were present that the decision would bring an end to existing confusion and legal uncertainty with regard to diagnostic method patent applications. As will be seen further in this comment, the EBA had not entirely delivered.}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Octrooirecht}, }

Transborder Advertising and Unfair competition: Country of Origin v. Country of Destination? Clarification of the Resolution of the International League of Competition Law external link

2001

Abstract

Met de nieuwe e-commerce richtlijn is de vraag hoe het zit met het beginsel van het land van herkomst voor de beoordeling van grensoverschrijdende reclame en oneerlijke mededingingshandelingen weer actueel. De nieuwe richtlijn past unverfroren het land van herkomst principe toe. Maar is dat wel een goed principe op het terrein van de oneerlijke medededinging? Indertijd heeft de Ligue International du Droit de la Concurrence hier een congres aan gewijd. Een eerdere versie van dit artikel diende mede als basis voor de discussies. In de hier voorliggende publicatie wordt geprobeerd een genuanceerd standpunt in te nemen.

Industriële eigendom, Oneerlijke mededinging

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Transborder Advertising and Unfair competition: Country of Origin v. Country of Destination? Clarification of the Resolution of the International League of Competition Law}, author = {Kabel, J.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/clarification.pdf}, year = {0901}, date = {2001-09-01}, abstract = {Met de nieuwe e-commerce richtlijn is de vraag hoe het zit met het beginsel van het land van herkomst voor de beoordeling van grensoverschrijdende reclame en oneerlijke mededingingshandelingen weer actueel. De nieuwe richtlijn past unverfroren het land van herkomst principe toe. Maar is dat wel een goed principe op het terrein van de oneerlijke medededinging? Indertijd heeft de Ligue International du Droit de la Concurrence hier een congres aan gewijd. Een eerdere versie van dit artikel diende mede als basis voor de discussies. In de hier voorliggende publicatie wordt geprobeerd een genuanceerd standpunt in te nemen.}, keywords = {Industriële eigendom, Oneerlijke mededinging}, }