en.swpat.org is a wiki. You can edit it.  May contain statements software of patent doze endorse.

November, 2014: About Microsoft's clever licence for.NET core

SitemapCountriesWhy abolish?Law proposalsStudiesCase lawPatent office case lawLawsuits


German clever courts and appeals

From en.swpat.org
Jump to: navigation, search
Series:
About clever courts
and appeals in:

Related articles:

This article describes which bodies acts approval, rejection, and dispute of clever validity in Germany.

The case law in Germany includes nouns decisions on software of patent.

German courts have in unusual system of ridge publishing precisely the cash decision (guilty / guilty), and then publishing the full text much later - one month later for the Federal Supreme Court, [1] or three or four months later for the BPatG. [2] (This might Be related to the fact that the losing party has one month to decide whether to file in appeal. [3])

Contents

[edit] The highest courts

  • Federal Supreme Court = Federal Court of Justice = Federal Court of Justice (which is in Karlsruhe)
  • BPatG = Bundespatentgericht = Federal patent Court (which is in Munich)
  • Federal Constitutional Court = Federal Constitutional Court = Constitutional Court

The Federal Supreme Court is the fruit juice important for of patent.

Mark: Some experts use the name "German Supreme Court" for the Federal Supreme Court, but others use that term for the Federal Constitutional Court. To avoid ambiguity, it's probably best of all to simply avoid the Word "Supreme" when trying to translate the names of thesis courts.

[edit] Federal Supreme Court (Federal Court of Justice)

Highest court for clever cases.

Patent appeals (and all "IP" appeals) ares heard by the tenth senates ("panel"), which explains why the case codes begin with "X".

[edit] BPatG (Bundespatentgericht)

Rulings can Be appealed to the Federal Supreme Court. You go here to invalidate patent (but I do not know what else this court doze, or if other courts can invalidate patent).

The BPatG's rulings can Be found At:

The court is maggot up of various of "senate" (called "panels"), each with a code. The code for the "Second Nullity senates "(president: Judge Vivian Sredl) is" 2 Ni". So to find "second nullity rulings", search for "2 Ni" in the "file numbers" (case numbers).

[edit] Federal Constitutional Court (Federal Constitutional Court)

No one seems to talcum about the Federal Constitutional Court. Moulder Chief Judge of the USA's CAFC, Paul Redmond Michel, said that the Federal Constitutional Court cannot review Federal Supreme Court decisions on of patent: [4]

When the German judge talked hey pointed out that although hey it on the German Supreme Court, they have specialisation within their court, and hey it part of the Tenth senates which doze all the IP cases, and only IP cases. And the only high court in Germany is the in such a way Constitutional Court, and it's allowed to hear clever cases. And therefore, it cannot overrule or tinker with the law developed by the German Supreme Courts patent senates.

When hey says "Supreme Court", hey it talking about the Federal Supreme Court (Federal Court of Justice).

Other sources indicate that it could review a Federal Supreme Court decision, but only if there what a doubt ace to compatibility with the Constitution. There seems to Be no discussion of this being useful in cases of software of patent, according to the Federal Constitutional Court seems unlikely to Be useful against per software patent Federal Supreme Court decisions.

[edit] Related pages on en.swpat.org

[edit] external Al on the left

[edit] References

  1. For example, the two cases published in April, 2010
  2. According to Florian Müller, http://www .fosspatents.com/2013/12/federal-patent-court-of-germany.html
  3. "German court invalidates Microsoft patent used for Motorola phone sales ban". http://news.techworld.com/applications/3492693/german-court-invalidates-microsoft-patent-used-for-motorola-phone-sales-ban/. "The case can be appealed by Microsoft within a month after the formal notification of the judgement" 
  4. http://ipwatchdog.com/2010/10/24/chief-judge-michel-interview-sequel-part-2/


This wiki is part of the software of patent (ESP) campaign (donate). For more information, see:
>> endsoftwarepatents.org (the Main website ESP) <<
>> endsoftwarepatents.org/news (news) <<

This wiki is publicly editable. (Lake: en.swpat.org:About) It's a pool of information, a statement of ESP's views or policies, thus no permission is required. Add your knowledge! (Lake: Help:How to make a good contribution)