tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post5017625834247123475..comments2023-08-17T14:09:24.945+01:00Comments on PatLit: the patent litigation weblog: The Unified Patent Court and pay-to-opt-out: a critical analysisUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post-24292057118518593482015-07-24T20:05:07.709+01:002015-07-24T20:05:07.709+01:00Here again, the eagerness of politicians to push t...Here again, the eagerness of politicians to push through the UPC is clearly apparent. In order to be sure that European patents have to go through the UPC, no exception to its jurisdiction has in principle been tolerated. Realising that this might go too far, the opt-out possibility was created.<br /><br />The two comments on the legality of the opt-out fee are clearly showing that such legality is missing.<br /><br />Why should a proprietor pay for something he does not want? That is the same as if one would have to pay directly for public transport, even if one does not want to use it (btw everybody is paying for public transport through taxes..).<br /><br />When looking at filing statistics at the EPO, in the last three years the proportion of patents coming from the member states of the EPO has gone down from 50% to 35%. Who will benefit of the UPC in the long term. Certainly not SMEs, individual inventors and universities. It is not the reduction of fees or translation costs which will really help those entities. Only help in case of litigation would really be an incentive for those entities.<br /><br />In view of this figures, I'm It is to be hoped that the UPC will not be <br /><br />It is to be feared that by creating the UPC, European politicians are actually helping foreign proprietors to more easily attack European industry. Have they ever thought of this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com