DOCSLIB.ORG

Geographical Indications at the Crossroads of Trade, Development, and Culture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geographical Indications at the Crossroads of Trade, Development, and Culture Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 geographical indications at the crossroads of trade, development, and culture Historically, few topics have proven to be so controversial in international intellectual property as the protection of geographical indications (GIs). The adoption of TRIPS in 1994 did not resolve disagreements, and countries worldwide continue to quarrel today as to the nature, the scope, and the enforcement of GI protection nationally and internationally. Thus far, however, there is little literature addressing GI protection from the point of view of the Asia- Pacific region, even though countries in this region have actively discussed the topic and in several instances have promoted GIs as a mechanism to foster local development and safeguard local culture. This book, edited by renowned intellectual property scholars, fills the void in the current literature and offers a variety of contributions focusing on the framework and effects of GI protection in the Asia-Pacific region. The book is available Open Access at http://dx.doi.org/10 .1017/9781316711002. Irene Calboli is Lee Kong Chian Fellow, Visiting Professor, and Deputy Director of the Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia (ARCIALA), School of Law, Singapore Management University. She is also Professor of Law at Texas A&M University School of Law and Transatlantic Technology Law Forum Fellow at Stanford Law School. An elected member of the American Law Institute, she has written extensively on the topic of geographical indications (GIs) and has acted as Expert on GIs for the World Intellectual Property Organization and the European Union Intellectual Property Office. Ng-Loy Wee Loon is Professor at the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore. Her publications include the textbook on the Law of Intellectual Property of Singapore (2nd ed. 2014). She was the Founding Deputy Director at the Intellectual Property Academy of Singapore, and is currently a member of the Singapore’s Copyright Tribunal and of the Singapore Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy Panel. She is also Senior Counsel (honoris causa) (an appointment made by Singapore’s Court of Appeal and Attorney-General). Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 Geographical Indications at the Crossroads of Trade, Development, and Culture focus on asia-pacific Edited by IRENE CALBOLI Singapore Management University and Texas A&M University NG-LOY WEE LOON National University of Singapore Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 University Printing House, Cambridge CB28BS, United Kingdom One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10006, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia 4843/24, 2nd Floor, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi – 110002, India 79 Anson Road, #06–04/06, Singapore 079906 Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge. It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence. www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107166332 DOI: 10.1017/9781316711002 © Irene Calboli and Ng-Loy Wee Loon 2017 This work is in copyright. It is subject to statutory exceptions and to the provisions of relevant licensing agreements; with the exception of the Creative Commons version the link for which is provided below, the reproduction of any part of this work may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. An online version of this work is published at http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781316711002 under a Creative Commons Open Access license CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 which permits re-use, distribution and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes providing appropriate credit to the original work is given. You may not distribute derivative works without permission. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 All versions of this work may contain content reproduced under license from third parties. Permission to reproduce this third-party content must be obtained from these third-parties directly. When citing this work, please include a reference to the DOI 10.1017/9781316711002 First published 2017 A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library. ISBN 978-1-107-16633-2 Hardback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 Contents List of Contributors page viii Editors’ Preface xv part i framing the debate: the still-contested role of geographical indications in the global economy 1 1 Geographical Indications between Trade, Development, Culture, and Marketing: Framing a Fair(er) System of Protection in the Global Economy? Irene Calboli 3 2 From Geography to History: Geographical Indications and the Reputational Link Dev S. Gangjee 36 3 The Limited Promise of Geographical Indications for Farmers in Developing Countries Justin Hughes 61 4 Rethinking the Work of Geographical Indications in Asia: Addressing Hidden Geographies of Gendered Labor Rosemary J. Coombe and S. Ali Malik 87 5 A Look at the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement: A Missed Opportunity? Daniel Gervais 122 part ii geographical indications at the crossroads of international and national trade 145 6 Geographical Indications and Mega-Regional Trade Agreements and Negotiations Susy Frankel 147 v Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 vi Contents 7 Geographical Indications as Property: European Union Association Agreements and Investor–State Provisions Anselm Kamperman Sanders 168 8 How Would Geographical Indications from Asia Fare in Europe? Christopher Heath 186 9 Looking Beyond the Known Story: How the Prehistory of Protection of Geographical Indications in the Americas Provides an Alternate Approach Christine Haight Farley 212 10 European Union-Singapore Free Trade Agreement: A New Chapter for Geographical Indications in Singapore Susanna H.S. Leong 235 part iii the promise and problems of geographical indications for local and rural development 257 11 Sunshine in a Bottle? Geographical Indications, the Australian Wine Industry, and the Promise of Rural Development Peter Drahos 259 12 Legal Protection of Geographical Indications as a Means to Foster Social and Economic Development in Malaysia Tay Pek San 281 13 The Use of Geographical Indications in Vietnam: A Promising Tool for Socioeconomic Development? Barbara Pick, Delphine Marie-Vivien, and Dong Bui Kim 305 14 ‘Vanity GIs’: India’s Legislation on Geographical Indications and the Missing Regulatory Framework Yogesh Pai and Tania Singla 333 15 Protection of Geographical Indications in Taiwan: Turning a Legal Conundrum into a Policy Tool for Development Szu-Yuan Wang 359 16 A Unique Type of Cocktail: Protection of Geographical Indications in China Haiyan Zheng 380 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.126, on 26 Sep 2021 at 17:19:35, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/3E2DD2994578FC243041D3EEFFEC39B3 Contents vii 17 The Potentials, and Current Challenges, of Protecting Geographical Indications in Sri Lanka Naazima Kamardeen 409 part iv the shifting relationship between geographical indications, traditional knowledge, and cultural heritage 437 18 The Geographical Indication Act 2013: Protection of Traditional Knowledge in Bangladesh with Special Reference to Jamdani Mahua Zahur 439 19 From Chianti to Kimchi: Geographical Indications, Intangible Cultural Heritage, and Their Unsettled Relationship with Cultural Diversity Tomer
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ACT No. 173/2002 Coll. of 9 April 2002 on Fees for Maintenance of Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates for Medicame
    ACT No. 173/2002 Coll. of 9 April 2002 on Fees for Maintenance of Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates for Medicaments and Plant Protection Products and on Amendment of some Acts PART ONE FEES FOR MAINTENANCE OF PATENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY PROTECTION CERTIFICATES FOR MEDICAMENTS AND FOR PLANT PROTECTION PRODUCTS Section 1 Subject matter of regulation (1) This Act shall regulate assessment and collection of fees for maintenance of a patent in force (“maintenance fees for a patent”), fees for maintenance of a European patent with effects for the Czech Republic in force (“maintenance fees for a European patent”), fees for maintenance of a supplementary protection certificate for medicaments and for plant protection products in force (“maintenance fees for supplementary certificates”).1 (2) Fees according to paragraph 1 shall be assessed and collected by the Industrial Property Office (“Office”). Section 2 Rates Rates of maintenance fees for a patent, maintenance fees for a European patent and maintenance fees for supplementary certificates are laid down in the tariff of maintenance fees, which is listed in the appendix to this Act. Section 3 Payer (1) The payer of maintenance fees for a patent shall be the patent holder. (2) The payer of maintenance fees for a European patent shall be the holder of the European patent with effects for the Czech Republic (“European patent”). (3) The payer of maintenance fees for supplementary certificates shall be the holder of the supplementary protection certificate for medicaments and for plant protection products (“supplementary certificate”). 1 Act No. 527/1990 Coll., on Inventions and Rationalisation Proposals, as amended by later regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Utility Model
    Utility model An information brochure on utility model protection UTILITY MODEL PROTECTION | 3 Contents The utility model – the underrated industrial property right ................... 4 The most important differences between the utility model and the patent .... 5 Searches give you security.................................................... 6 Patent or utility model? Patent and utility model! ............................. 7 How to apply................................................................. 8 Your application has priority.................................................. 9 Cancellation proceedings – the utility model is put to the test ................ 10 Service.......................................................................11 4 | UTILITY MODEL PROTECTION The utility model – the underrated industrial property right You are looking for fast and low-cost The examination and grant of a patent protection for your invention? Then the usually takes several years. The utility model, utility model – the “little brother” of the in contrast, will be registered within a few patent – is the right thing for you. months after filing the application, provided the documents filed comply with the provi- Like the patent, it can protect all technical sions of the Utility Model Law. inventions, including also chemical sub- stances, food and medicinal products, except The IP right becomes effective upon registra- for processes (manufacturing and working tion and it gives you the same rights as a processes, measuring processes, and others). patent: exclusive right to use, produce and market your invention. You may prohibit any person from doing the same. UTILITY MODEL PROTECTION | 5 The most important differences between the utility model and the patent The utility model is an unexamined IP right. Another important difference to the patent is The registration procedure does not examine the “life” of a utility model. A patent can be novelty, inventive step and industrial maintained for 20 years, while a utility model applicability.
    [Show full text]
  • Patents and Standards
    Patents and Standards A modern framework for IPR-based standardization FINAL REPORT A study prepared for the European Commission Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry This study was carried out for the European Commission by and as part of the DISCLAIMER By the European Commission, Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. ISBN 978-92-79-35991-0 DOI: 10.2769/90861 © European Union, 2014. All rights reserved. Certain parts are licensed under conditions to the EU. Reproduction is authorized provided the source is acknowledged. About ECSIP The European Competitiveness and Sustainable Industrial Policy Consortium, ECSIP Consortium for short, is the name chosen by the team of partners, subcontractors and individual experts that have agreed to work as one team for the purpose of the Framework Contract on ‘Industrial Competitiveness and Market Performance’. The Consortium is composed of Ecorys Netherlands (lead partner), Cambridge Econometrics, CASE, CSIL, Danish Technological Institute, Decision, Eindhoven University of Technology (ECIS), Euromonitor, Fratini Vergano, Frost & Sullivan, IDEA Consult, IFO Institute, MCI and wiiw, together with a group of 28 highly-skilled and specialised individuals. ECSIP Consortium p/a ECORYS Nederland BV Watermanweg 44 3067 GG Rotterdam P.O. Box 4175 3006 AD Rotterdam The Netherlands T.
    [Show full text]
  • 20100801 Tarifes
    Schedule of Charges - April 2010 - EUR Official Professional EUROPEAN PATENTS Total fees1 fees EuroPCT Filing (regional phase of PCT) EuroPCT filing (electronic filing) 105 810 915 Requesting examination and paying designations 2170 270 2440 - Examination fee: 1645 € - Designation fee: 525 € Other charges upon filing - Extension fee: 102 € per country 102* -- 102* - Translation of specification from Spanish into English, (100 words) -- 22* 22* - Additional fee for each page in excess of 352 13* -- 13* - Claim fee, for each claim in excess of 15: From 16 to 50: 210€/claim 210* -- 210* In excess of 51: 525€/claim 525* -- 525* - Requesting supplementary European Search màx. 1150 270 màx. 1320 - Late filing of documents -- 100 100 - Proceedings related with claims' amendment under Rule 161 -- 270 270 EP Filing Standard EP filing 1210 1080 2290 - Filing fee: 105 € (electronic filing) - Search fee: 1105 € Other charges upon filing - Translation of specification from Spanish into English, (100 words) -- 22* 22* - Additional fee for each page in excess of 352 13* -- 13* - Claim fee, for each claim in excess of 15: From 16 to 50: 210€/claim 210* -- 210* In excess of 51: 525€/claim 525* -- 525* - Late filing of documents -- 100 100 Request Examination Requesting examination and paying designations 2005 270 2275 - Examination fee: 1480 € - Designation fee3: 525 € - Designation fee3: 90 € per country (maximum 630 €) Other charges when requesting examination - Extension fee: 102 € per country 102* -- 102* Examination Replying to Official Action -- 270 270 Grant4 Printing fee and filing of claim translations 830 350 1180 Other charges upon grant - Additional fee for each page in excess of 353 13* -- 13* - Translation of claims, each 100 words into French and German -- 50* 50* NOTE: The above professional fees do not include substantial patent work such as drafting applications, answering official actions, drafting amendments, arguments and statements of grounds, meeting with clients and the like.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementation of the Convention on the Grant of European Patents Act
    International Portal of the University of Portal Internacional de la Universidad Alicante on Intellectual Property & de Alicante sobre Propiedad Industrial Information Society e Intelectual y Sociedad de la Información IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE GRANT OF EUROPEAN PATENTS ACT. Unofficial translation Passed on 17 April 2002, enter into force on the day of entering into force of the accession of the Republic of Estonia to the Convention on the grant of European Patents (RT I 2002, 38, 233) Section 1. Scope of application of Act This Act provides for the legal status of European patents and patent applications in Estonia and regulates legal relations arising from the accession of the Republic of Estonia to the Convention on the grant of European Patents (European Patent Convention) not covered by the Patent Act (RT I 1994, 25, 406; 1998, 74, 1227; 107, 1768; 1999, 84, 764; 2001, 27, 151) or the said Convention. Section 2. Definitions For the purposes of this Act: 1) Convention means the Convention on the grant of European Patents (European Patent Convention), done at Munich on 5 October 1973; 2) Organisation means the European Patent Organisation as established by the Convention; 3) European Patent Office means the organ of the Organisation carrying out their task to grant European patents; 4) Contracting State means a contracting state of the Convention; 5) For the purposes of the Convention Estonian Patent Office means the central industrial property office in Estonia; 6) European patent means a patent granted by the European
    [Show full text]
  • Faqs About the Unitary Patent System and Unitary Patent Court
    FAQs About the Unitary Patent System and Unitary Patent Court Can pending EPO applicants select the UP option? Yes. The new system will apply to currently pending applications in the EPO that proceed to grant after the implementation date. How does an EPO applicant select the UP option? An EPO applicant can postpone the decision on whether to select the UP option or the national validation option until the application proceeds to grant. Applicants must then select the UP option within one month of the EPO grant date. EPO applicants who do not wish to obtain a UP or who want protection in countries that are not part of the UPS may elect to validate nationally after grant according to the current deadlines (three months after grant in most EPO members). EPO applicants can also select a combination of a UP and validating nationally in countries that are not part of the UPS. What are the translation requirements for the UP? Generally, the requirements will be less burdensome than for the current national validation or direct national filing routes. During the first twelve years of the UPS, only one translation will be necessary. Patents prosecuted in French or German must be translated into English. Patents prosecuted in English must be translated into any other EU language (not limited to French and German). After the transitional period, no translations will be required. What are the validation and maintenance costs? There is no validation fee. There is a single annual maintenance fee equivalent to the cost of four national renewal fees (UK, France, Germany and Netherlands).
    [Show full text]
  • 495/2008 Coll
    ____________________________________________________________ 495/2008 Coll. ACT of November 6, 2008 on maintenance fee for the patent, maintenance fee for the European patent with effects for the Slovak Republic and the maintenance fee for the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal and plant protection products and on amendment of some acts Amended by: 600/2008 Coll. Amended by: 519/2010 Coll. The National Council of the Slovak Republic has adopted the following Act: Title I Article 1 Subject-matter of the regulation This Act shall govern the amount and collecting the fee for the maintenance of the patent1) (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee for the patent”), the fee for maintenance of the European patent with effects for the Slovak Republic1) (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee for the European patent”), the fee for maintenance of the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal and plant protection products2) (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee for the supplementary protection certificate”). Article 2 Payer (1) The owner of the patent or a person authorised by the owner shall be the payer of the maintenance fee. (2) The owner of the European patent with effects for the Slovak Republic (hereinafter referred to as “European patent”) or a person authorised by the owner shall be the payer of the maintenance fee. (3) The owner of the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal and plant protection products (hereinafter referred to as “supplementary protection certificate”) or a person authorised by the owner shall be the payer of the maintenance fee. (4) If there are several payers, they are required to pay the maintenance fee for the patent, the maintenance fee for the European patent, maintenance fee for the supplementary protection certificate (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee”), they are obliged to pay it jointly and severally.
    [Show full text]
  • One Patent (And Court) to Rule Them All: an Unexpected European Decision?
    One Patent (and Court) to Rule Them All: An Unexpected European Decision? By Kevin White1 Coming as a surprise to some, the European Parliament approved rules creating a Unified Patent Court and a Unitary Patent on December 11, 2012, after lengthy consideration. Hailed by many as an important step forward for European competitiveness in the intellectual property marketplace, the international agreement creating the Unified Court is set to go into effect at the later of January 1, 2014, or after thirteen contracting states ratify it (which must include the UK, France, and Germany among the thirteen). The European Union (EU) Unitary Patent will become an available option at the European Patent Office (EPO) at the same time. Based on the current political climate (and Parliament voting statistics), it appears likely that both will be effective for at least 25 member states by 2014. 2 History The European Patent Convention (EPC) has effectively governed the granting of patents in Europe since 1978. The EPC is an intergovernmental agreement between 38 European States, including all 27 EU Member States. Applicants can apply for a European Patent at the EPO in one of three accepted languages (English, French, German), and a granted European Patent must be validated by each individual nation in which an applicant desires protection. Each validation process involves additional fees and may involve additional translation costs, and each nation can (and does) charge its own maintenance fees (also referred to as “renewal” fees, or “annuities”) for
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Patent Fees - Current, Final Rule and Unit Cost
    Table of Patent Fees - Current, Final Rule and Unit Cost Current Fees Final Rule Fees Increase/(Decrease) Percentage Change Unit Cost Large Small Micro Large Small Micro Large Small Micro Large Small Micro Change in Large Fee Code 37 CFR Description Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity Entity FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Entity Fees is Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee >10% AND >$20 Patent Application Filing Fees Basic Filing fee - Utility (paper filing also requires non-electronic 1011/2011/3011 1.16(a) filing fee under 1.16(t)) $280 $140 $70 $300 $150 $75 $20 $10 $5 7% 7% 7% $262 $257 $277 4011 1.16(a) Basic filing fee - Utility (electronic filing for small entities) n/a $70 n/a n/a $75 n/a n/a $5 n/a n/a 7% n/a n/a $257 n/a 1012/2012/3012 1.16(b) Basic Filing Fee - Design $180 $90 $45 $200 $100 $50 $20 $10 $5 11% 11% 11% $262 $257 $277 1017/2017/3017 1.16(b) Basic Filing Fee - Design (CPA) $180 $90 $45 $200 $100 $50 $20 $10 $5 11% 11% 11% $707 $772 $884 1013/2013/3013 1.16(c) Basic Filing Fee - Plant $180 $90 $45 $200 $100 $50 $20 $10 $5 11% 11% 11% $262 $257 $277 1005/2005/3005 1.16(d) Provisional Application Filing Fee $260 $130 $65 $280 $140 $70 $20 $10 $5 8% 8% 8% $152 $144 $154 1014/2014/3014 1.16(e) Basic Filing Fee - Reissue $280 $140 $70 $300 $150 $75 $20 $10 $5 7% 7% 7% $260 $256 $277 1019/2019/3019 1.16(e) Basic Filing Fee - Reissue (CPA) $280 $140 $70 $300 $150 $75 $20 $10 $5 7% 7% 7% $707 $772 $884 Surcharge - Late Filing Fee, Search Fee, Examination Fee, Inventor's Oath
    [Show full text]
  • Decree No. 19/2005. (IV. 12.) GKM on the Fees for Administrative Services in Industrial Property Procedures Before the Hungarian Patent Office As Amended by Decree No
    Decree No. 19/2005. (IV. 12.) GKM Consolidated text (01.01.2012) Decree No. 19/2005. (IV. 12.) GKM on the Fees for Administrative Services in Industrial Property Procedures before the Hungarian Patent Office By virtue of the authorization under Article 3(3) of Act IV of 1992 on the fees for administrative services in industrial property procedures I order – in agreement with the Minister of Finance and the President of the Hungarian Patent Office – as follows: Obligation to Pay Fees Article 1 (1) In industrial property procedures fees for administrative services (hereinafter referred to as "fees") shall be paid under this Decree. (2) For the purposes of this Decree "industrial property procedures" shall mean procedures concerning patents, plant variety protection, utility model protection, topography protection, design protection, protection of trade marks and geographical indications, as well as procedures relating to supplementary protection certificates fall within the competence of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as “the Office”). Exemption from Fees Article 2 [repealed] Patent Fees Article 3 (1) The filing and search fee is HUF 37 400, which is increased by HUF 1 900 for each claim from the eleventh to the twentieth, by HUF 3 800 for each claim from the twenty- first to the thirtieth and by HUF 5 600 for the thirty-first and each subsequent claim. (2) The fee for a request for a search report supplemented with a written opinion (hereinafter referred to as “written opinion”) is HUF 30 800, which is to be paid in addition to the filing and search fee and the fee for a request for division [Article 15(3)].
    [Show full text]
  • Act No. 495/2008 Coll. on Maintenance Fees for Patents
    ____________________________________________________________ 495/2008 Coll. ACT of November 6, 2008 on maintenance fee for the patent, maintenance fee for the European patent with effects for the Slovak Republic and the maintenance fee for the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal and plant protection products and on amendment of some acts Amended by: 600/2008 Coll. Amended by: 519/2010 Coll. The National Council of the Slovak Republic has adopted the following Act: Title I Article 1 Subject-matter of the regulation This Act shall govern the amount and collecting the fee for the maintenance of the patent1) (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee for the patent”), the fee for maintenance of the European patent with effects for the Slovak Republic1) (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee for the European patent”), the fee for maintenance of the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal and plant protection products2) (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee for the supplementary protection certificate”). Article 2 Payer (1) The owner of the patent or a person authorised by the owner shall be the payer of the maintenance fee. (2) The owner of the European patent with effects for the Slovak Republic (hereinafter referred to as “European patent”) or a person authorised by the owner shall be the payer of the maintenance fee. (3) The owner of the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal and plant protection products (hereinafter referred to as “supplementary protection certificate”) or a person authorised by the owner shall be the payer of the maintenance fee. (4) If there are several payers, they are required to pay the maintenance fee for the patent, the maintenance fee for the European patent, maintenance fee for the supplementary protection certificate (hereinafter referred to as “maintenance fee”), they are obliged to pay it jointly and severally.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court Contents
    Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys Guide to the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court Contents Introduction 1 Part I: The Unitary Patent 2 Part II: The Unified Patent Court 16 Summary: How Dehns can support you 32 Appendix 34 Glossary of terms 38 1 Introduction The biggest change to the European Under the Unitary Patent system, patent applicants patent system in decades is on its will be able to obtain patent protection across a large part of Europe with only one patent. This will way. Soon – possibly as early as the be simpler, and potentially cheaper, than obtaining start of 2017 – it will be possible equivalent protection under the current system. to obtain a single patent covering Enforcing patent rights across Europe should also be multiple EU countries. This will be simpler, as the UPC’s judgments will be enforceable known as a European Patent with in multiple countries. However, the UPC could also make European Patents more vulnerable to validity Unitary Effect, or informally a “Unitary challenges. The new system will also raise a host Patent”. The rights conferred by a of new procedural and cost-related issues. It is Unitary Patent will be enforceable therefore vital to be aware of the new opportunities, through a new supranational court, and new risks, which the new system might pose for the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”). The your business. UPC will also hear challenges to the The Unitary Patent and UPC systems are complex. validity of European Patents, enabling This guide provides a general overview of key aspects invalid patents to be revoked across of these new systems, so it has been necessary to Europe without the need for separate simplify certain features.
    [Show full text]