EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Absence of European patent costs Europe

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 23 February 2012, updated 24 February 2012

While Germany, France and the UK argue over the seat of the main patent court, Europe is loosing €425,000 a day, writes Arnaldo Abruzzini from Eurochambres.

Arnaldo Abruzzini is the secretary-general of  Eurochambres, the European Association of Chambers of Commerce and Industry. The following was sent exclusively to EurActiv.

"The decades-old quest for a common EU patent came close to being resolved by the European Council in December 2011, but a fresh dispute over the seat of the main patent Court – Paris, Munich or London – blocked a final agreement.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom evidently attach considerable importance to securing the seat of a handful of judges, no doubt anticipating that a larger number of lawyers and patent attorneys will follow them. 

But while politicians remain torn over this petty turf war, European businesses and the European economy are losing sizeable amounts of money: a staggering €31 million went up in smoke between the previous discussion on the European patent dossier of 10 December 2011 and the most recent (again unsuccessful) attempt by the 20 February Competitiveness Council to resolve the impasse.

Indeed, according to a Eurochambres calculation, each day lost in negotiations costs no less than €425,000 to European businesses. 

This sum is based only on the costs of validating patents across 27 different countries and does not take into account additional administrative burdens generated by the complexity of registering transfers, licences and other rights or the issue of multiple litigations.

This is clearly an unacceptable burden for European companies seeking to innovate and in so doing to revitalise Europe’s stagnating economy.

Eurochambres urges Germany, France and the United Kingdom to finalise the negotiations without any further delay.  Postponing a decision to the end of June, the ultimate deadline set at the January European Council, would cost the EU economy a further €54 million.

European leaders have recently talked a lot about the cost of 'non-Europe' – the non-European patent is a prime example and it is a cost that increasingly we cannot afford."

COMMENTS

  • There are several fallacies in this report. First, the proposal has been opposed and criticized not only due to lack of agreement as to the seat of the court, but also due to a number of serious problems that will cost European business far more money than the current system. A major problem is making the European Court of Justice the court of last resort when it has issued poorly considered impractical decisions in other types of intellectual property. The problem is expected to get worse when technology is added to the mix of information to be considered. The seat of the court issue is only the tip of the iceberg. There needs to be more accountability to the stakeholders.

    This report also overlooks the fact that more than half the money spent on procedures before national patent offices after grant of a European patent is by non-European patent owners for services provided exclusively by European employees who spend most of that income in Europe. Therefore, the current system supports the European economy. Eliminating that system reduces income flowing into the EU economy from sources outside the EU.

    Moreover, there appears to still be a need for local patents and utility models despite that fact that EPO route has been available since 1978. Those systems remain important for the many SMEs which do not need international patent protection, because their market is domestic. Requiring such SMEs to eventually file for international protection under an EU patent may backfire, because they can simply not afford the more expensive international system. This would unduly favor large companies, which have not contributed as much to economic growth and employment as SMEs.

    Participation in a unitary EU patent system and a unitary court system for patent disputes should remain voluntary and should be implemented in a manner that makes sense for its stakeholders. Otherwise, the EU could undo what has been one of the greatest success stories in the history of Europe, namely a patent system that is considered one of the most advanced in the world and which applicants are willing to pay a premium to use. Let's be smart and take a good look at why scholars and practitioners all over Europe have been dismayed at the current proposal. With so much brain power in Europe, I'm sure we can find a better solution.

    Submitted by a concerned citizen of both the US and Europe with substantial experience in the patent field on both continents.

    By :
    Bob Lelkes
    - Posted on :
    24/02/2012
  • As an innovative entrepreneur, I couldn’t agree more with Arnaldo Abruzzini, the costs mentioned in the article are indeed an "unacceptable burden". The current system is time consuming, inefficient and imposes excessive red tape, all of which translates into unbearable costs for SMEs. Innovators like myself are the greatest victims of the current bloated patent system, change must happen soon. Governments should realise that our economic growth and our innovation capacity are harmed every time that the decision is postponed.

    Damir Tomicic, Chief Executive of Axinom and Member of the Association for Competitive Technology

    By :
    Damir Tomicic
    - Posted on :
    25/02/2012

Advertising

Sponsors

Videos

Video General News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Innovation & Enterprise Promoted videos

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising