tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post7658208772558316143..comments2023-08-17T14:09:24.945+01:00Comments on PatLit: the patent litigation weblog: Latest guidance on patent threatsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post-30401692700118470492009-08-03T07:36:08.059+01:002009-08-03T07:36:08.059+01:00Life is tough for German patent attorneys. Many of...Life is tough for German patent attorneys. Many of them take it for granted that, when it comes to patent law, what goes in Germany must apply the same all over the EU. They are fed a diet of "There are hundreds of patent judges in Germany, and virtually no patent litigation at all in England because it is so ruinously expensive, even for the winner." The proof (they think) is the very small number of reported cases coming out of England.<br /><br />As for American patent lawyers, who think US law rules the world, so for German patent attorneys, who think they have got it all sorted, on behalf of the entire EU.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post-67115498652029917932009-08-03T02:23:23.848+01:002009-08-03T02:23:23.848+01:00I'm not sure that German law makes the same di...I'm not sure that German law makes the same distinction between primary and secondary infringers as UK law (unless you know otherwise?)<br /><br />It may also be significant that the standard terms used in this case are not "why do you think you don't infringe" but "why do you feel you need not take the patent into consideration". OK, the effect is similar, but it doesn't explicitly use the 'i' word.<br /><br />Perhaps what the German attorney needs to explain is why he assumed that UK threats law would be the same as in Germany.Tim Jacksonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post-57278413073970592472009-08-02T20:46:32.043+01:002009-08-02T20:46:32.043+01:00Indeed, letters in such terms are pretty standard ...Indeed, letters in such terms are pretty standard in Germany. But a letter couched in terms of "Would you care to tell us why you think you don't infringe" is properly addressed to a manufacturer, or the CGC at Head Office, isn't it? What was the German patent attorney doing, directing it to a slew of retail shop managers at Boots the Chemists? Is that practice countenanced by the German courts, to write to the managers of branches of Schlecker or DM Markt, instead of to Head Office? I think that the German patent attorney firm culprit has some serious explaining to its client to do now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1949935810569534550.post-4756941359793939222009-07-30T23:17:06.716+01:002009-07-30T23:17:06.716+01:00Presumably the non-English lawyer was German? Let...Presumably the non-English lawyer was German? Letters in such terms are commonly written in Germany, and I understand that the German courts have held that they are NOT threatening.Tim Jacksonnoreply@blogger.com