Post-Grant Central Limitation – Instrument for Patent Owners
At the end of 2007, the European Patent Office (EPO) introduced new procedure after which, it became possible for a patentee to seek a central limitation or amend the patent application after grant for the patent.
The Grounds of the opposition of patent in Europe and its procedure opposition at the EPO
Opposition at the European Patent Office (EPO) is an opportunity to challenge the grant of a European patent in the nine months. Immediately following the publication of the mention that the patent has been granted, to either revoking the license entirely or concurrently restricting its scope of protection, for all states of the European Patent Convention (EPC) which are concerned for contracting. If the period for the opposition expires, multiple gestures for annulment across all countries where the license(s) have been endorsed are required to remove it in its entirety, which could be considerably more expensive. Unlike filing third-party observations on a pending patent application, the opposing entity becomes a full party to proceedings, i.e. is involved in discussions with the EPO and proprietor.
Recent developments in Europe Intellectual Property Arena
In our advance information-based economies, the security of licensed innovation is essential for advancing advancement and inventiveness, creating work, and enhancing aggressiveness. The European Commission attempts to fit laws identifying with industrial property rights in EU nations to maintain a strategic distance from barriers to exchange and to make proficient broad frameworks for the security of such rights. It battles against robbery and forging and aims to help organizations, particularly independent ventures, access and utilize licensed innovation rights all the more viable.
Blockchain has found its way into IP law
Technologies such as Ethereum and Bitcoin which are the backbone of cryptocurrencies have made Blockchain famous. Blockchain and other ledger technologies (based on the concept of open ledger) have been able to create a reliable framework by enabling various parties to make a transaction and verify what will be entered into a ledger in advance without letting anyone change any of the ledger entries later.
EUROPE UNIFIED PATENT COURT- DECIPHERING THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND LEGITIMACY OF THE ORGANIZATION
The debate surrounding the intellectual property legislation in the European Union has now reached a unique point of convergence. Recently, the German constitutional court’s decision to rule upon the legitimacy of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has left experts in the field wondering about the possible implications on the intellectual property regime, should the verdict be rendered in the negative. While the proposal to establish a UPC has been in the pipeline for quite some time now (owing to the numerous loops inevitably created by a regime as diverse and huge as the European Union), the festering problems plaguing the European Patent Office (EPO) seems to have strengthened the belief of lawmakers that a unified patent legislation may just be the much-needed shot in the arm for a systematic patent protection mechanism. Any discussion on the UPC, however, would be incomplete without attempting to understand the trajectory undertaken by the proponents of the unitary patent system, its pitfalls and advantages, the impact and why is there a need for a singular body to regulate the system of grant of patents in the European Union.