Is there a case to be made for a global patent system? The example of plant biotechnology

The assessment of patterns of patentability in plant biotechnology on the basis of existing statistics shows a considerable concentration of patents to a few countries, in particular the United States, Australia, Japan, China, Mexico, Brazil, Germany, Canada, New Zealand, South Korea, India, Spain and Hungary. These patterns suggest that there is a clear relationship between the choice of patent jurisdictions and the biotechnology regulatory framework. This observation of the geographic distribution of biotechnology patents lends credence to maintaining a system of territorial rights that allow for regulatory competition, but continuing the process of substantive patent law harmonization which potentially minimize trade barriers.

Broad Concerns about Nanotechnology Patents: Symptoms and Diagnosis

We discuss the concerns that the patenting activity in the new nanotechnologies could blur the line between what is considered a discovery and what can be considered as an invention. We find that the nature of nanotechnology products, research, and the development agendas in science and engineering fields that include biomimetics pose a challenge to the present practice of including chemicals as eligible patent subject matter. After revisiting the historical development of patent law and noting its divergence from the developments in science and technology, we introduce the distinction between simple and complex machines as these relate to chemistry and nanotechnology. This distinction poses the question of what is the logical category of inventions that fall within patentable subject matter given that patent law was conceived to cover simple machines, not complex ones.

Swiss Patent Jurisprudence 2012

The new Swiss Federal Patent Court, with nationwide first-instance jurisdiction over all civil patent matters, has been operating since January 1, 2012. This article reviews and contextualizes the most important patent cases published in 2012 by the Swiss Federal Patent Court and the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. More specifically, the article covers cases on issues such as the evidentiary status of party expert opinions, the formal requirements for requests for injunctive relief, the infringement and non-obviousness tests employed by the Swiss Federal Patent Court, the use of reports and statements from technical judges in lieu of expert opinions, and the procedural devices for the pre-trial taking of evidence, in particular the new patent-specific device of precise description. The author suggests that designing the Federal Patent Court to include technically trained judges may lead to a more automatic adoption of the practices and case law of the European Patent Office. The article concludes that the revamped Swiss patent litigation system has the potential of turning Switzerland into a competitive venue for the adjudication of patent matters in Europe.

Challenges to the Patent System in face of Open Hardware

Dannie Jost gave a presentation outlining some of the challenges to the patent system presented by open source hardware at the "Open Knowledge Festival", under the topic stream treating open design, hardware, manufacturing and making; September 19, 2012; Helsinki, Finland. This topic stream generated considerable discussion, and it serves to educate an audience that is usually very adverse to patents and copyright, and helps the researcher understand the issuing conflicts surrounding emerging technologies, in particular digital technologies, and the maker movement (digitally enabled).

TRIPS and Special & Differential Treatment – Revisiting the Case for Derogations in Applying Patent Protection for Pharmaceuticals in Developing Count

In this paper we apply an implicit threshold approach, malleable to the principle of graduation, to identify countries that should benefit from derogations from WTO TRIPS commitments for pharmaceutical patents under the tenets of Special and Differential Treatment. This is based on the identification of four broad constraints loosely classified as; economic constraints; access topharmaceuticals; capacity constraints; and incidence of health outcomes. We identify these by means of analytical criteria and create a composite index that ranks countries according to the observed constraints which delimit the capabilities and desirability of implementing TRIPs disciplines. We discuss the use of negotiated weights and thresholds in determining participation and graduation into general provisions of the agreement. It follows that countries below the chosen threshold should be exempt from these hence receiving Special and Differential Treatment.