Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]

The coexistence of the national patent, of the European patent and of the newer creation – the Community patent – does not impair, in any way, the optimum operation of the single market in general and of the free movement of goods in particular. Due to the different regulations in the national laws...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Roxana Elena LAZAR
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=b7746e99-6468-4f9f-a686-138da6d9ea17&articleId=79517cfc-0544-44d8-ae47-c68eb8a55980
id ftrepec:oai:RePEc:lum:rev4rl:v:3-4:y:2009:i::p:27-35
record_format openpolar
spelling ftrepec:oai:RePEc:lum:rev4rl:v:3-4:y:2009:i::p:27-35 2024-04-14T08:20:21+00:00 Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent] Roxana Elena LAZAR http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=b7746e99-6468-4f9f-a686-138da6d9ea17&articleId=79517cfc-0544-44d8-ae47-c68eb8a55980 unknown http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=b7746e99-6468-4f9f-a686-138da6d9ea17&articleId=79517cfc-0544-44d8-ae47-c68eb8a55980 article ftrepec 2024-03-19T10:41:39Z The coexistence of the national patent, of the European patent and of the newer creation – the Community patent – does not impair, in any way, the optimum operation of the single market in general and of the free movement of goods in particular. Due to the different regulations in the national laws regarding intellectual property rights, originally, there was a risk that the national goods markets in the European Union might stay completely separate, operating differently. The case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities (the decisions Consten-Grundig - 58/64 of July 13, 1966, Parke Davis - 24/67 of February 29, 1968, Centrofarm vs Sterling Drug - 15/74 of October 18, 1974, Terrapin vs. Terranova -119/75 of June 22, 1976, Hoffmann-Laroche - 102/77 of May 23, 1978) had an important role in standardizing them, by making a clear distinction between the intellectual property rights and their exercise. But the number of legal systems in effect regarding the regulation of the patent is still equal to the number of Member-States in the European Union. A comparison between the present European patent and the patents in the USA or Japan, from the point of view of costs, makes clear the excessive costs of obtaining a European patent (as high as eight times the cost in Japan, for example). The solution identified by the European legislator was to establish the Community patent. The preservation of the role of the European Patent Office (the same institution involved in the European patenting process) is combined with the accessibility of patenting costs for the patent applicants (especially for small and medium enterprises for whom they are intended), with the establishment of a single, unitary set of procedural rules and with a unitary and compulsory legal interpretation in the entire European Union, meant to lower the cost of the Community patent to half the cost of the European patent. patent; Community patent; European patent; right; case-law Article in Journal/Newspaper Terranova RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) Terrapin ENVELOPE(-57.583,-57.583,-63.950,-63.950)
institution Open Polar
collection RePEc (Research Papers in Economics)
op_collection_id ftrepec
language unknown
description The coexistence of the national patent, of the European patent and of the newer creation – the Community patent – does not impair, in any way, the optimum operation of the single market in general and of the free movement of goods in particular. Due to the different regulations in the national laws regarding intellectual property rights, originally, there was a risk that the national goods markets in the European Union might stay completely separate, operating differently. The case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities (the decisions Consten-Grundig - 58/64 of July 13, 1966, Parke Davis - 24/67 of February 29, 1968, Centrofarm vs Sterling Drug - 15/74 of October 18, 1974, Terrapin vs. Terranova -119/75 of June 22, 1976, Hoffmann-Laroche - 102/77 of May 23, 1978) had an important role in standardizing them, by making a clear distinction between the intellectual property rights and their exercise. But the number of legal systems in effect regarding the regulation of the patent is still equal to the number of Member-States in the European Union. A comparison between the present European patent and the patents in the USA or Japan, from the point of view of costs, makes clear the excessive costs of obtaining a European patent (as high as eight times the cost in Japan, for example). The solution identified by the European legislator was to establish the Community patent. The preservation of the role of the European Patent Office (the same institution involved in the European patenting process) is combined with the accessibility of patenting costs for the patent applicants (especially for small and medium enterprises for whom they are intended), with the establishment of a single, unitary set of procedural rules and with a unitary and compulsory legal interpretation in the entire European Union, meant to lower the cost of the Community patent to half the cost of the European patent. patent; Community patent; European patent; right; case-law
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Roxana Elena LAZAR
spellingShingle Roxana Elena LAZAR
Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]
author_facet Roxana Elena LAZAR
author_sort Roxana Elena LAZAR
title Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]
title_short Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]
title_full Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]
title_fullStr Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]
title_full_unstemmed Brevetul comunitar [The Community Patent]
title_sort brevetul comunitar [the community patent]
url http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=b7746e99-6468-4f9f-a686-138da6d9ea17&articleId=79517cfc-0544-44d8-ae47-c68eb8a55980
long_lat ENVELOPE(-57.583,-57.583,-63.950,-63.950)
geographic Terrapin
geographic_facet Terrapin
genre Terranova
genre_facet Terranova
op_relation http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=b7746e99-6468-4f9f-a686-138da6d9ea17&articleId=79517cfc-0544-44d8-ae47-c68eb8a55980
_version_ 1796298608283222016