Newsletter
IP SYMPOSIUM'S CONSENSUS ON CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
Different judges' different opinions on the same issue in a dispute over intellectual property rights may result in different judgments on the same type of case, which in turn leads to a high degree of uncertainty about the outcome of a case. To solve this problem, the Judicial Yuan and the Intellectual Property Court jointly held the IP symposium in June 2009. The participants, including judges, representatives of the Intellectual Property Office, lawyers, and scholars, had a thorough discussion of the divergent judgments collected from different courts and categorized beforehand. After the discussion, the judges reached consensus on several issues by vote. The consensus will be circulated among the judges for their reference, and it is highly possible that the judges will follow it when reviewing similar cases in the future, even though legally speaking, such consensus does not have any binding effect on the judges.
The consensus reached in the symposium includes the following issues:
First, the Intellectual Property Office is not entitled or allowed to submit any new evidence against the adverse party in the administrative suits relating to cancellation and revocation of a trademark or invalidation of a patent. Second, even after granting exclusive license, a patentee is still entitled and allowed to claim against infringers. Third, an unregistered exclusive licensee of a patent may legitimately claim damages against infringers. Lastly, for the preservation of evidence during civil procedures, police authorities may not be requested to exercise coercive power.