Intellectual property

Anticompetitive practices

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds an infringement decision for pay-for-delay pharmaceutical deals (GlaxoSmithKline)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
CAT upholds infringement decision for pay for delay pharma deals* The Competition Appeal Tribunal has upheld the CMA decision that GlaxoSmithKline and some generic suppliers of the anti-depressant paroxetine broke competition law. The Competition Appeal Tribunal (Tribunal) has, however, (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upholds the FTC’s decision in the first fully litigated reverse payment decision against generic pharmaceutical companies (Endo / Impax)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
On April 13, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the Federal Trade Commission’s decision that Impax Laboratories entered an anticompetitive “reverse payment” settlement with Endo Pharmaceuticals. This case was the FTC’s first fully litigated reverse payment case since the (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upholds the FTC’s ruling regarding an unlawful pay-for-delay agreement in the pharmaceutical sector (Endo / Impax)
Baker Botts (Washington)
,
Baker Botts (Washington)
,
Baker Botts (Washington)
On April 13, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC” or “Commission”) ruling that the “reverse-payment” settlement agreement between Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Endo”) and Impax Laboratories LLC (“Impax”) violated federal antitrust laws. The (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rules that showing the reverse payment settlement eliminated the possibility of an earlier generic entry is enough to infer anticompetitive effect (Endo / Impax)
Jones Day (New York)
,
Jones Day (Washington DC)
,
Jones Day (Washington DC)
In Short The Background: In the Supreme Court’s landmark 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis, the Court determined that large payments by branded drugmakers to potential generic entrants to settle patent disputes could be anticompetitive. It instructed district courts to apply the "rule of reason" (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upholds the FTC’s decision that two pharmaceutical companies entered an anticompetitive reverse payment settlement (Endo / Impax)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
On April 13, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the Federal Trade Commission’s decision that Impax Laboratories entered an anticompetitive “reverse payment” settlement with Endo Pharmaceuticals. This case was the FTC’s first fully litigated reverse payment case since the (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upholds the FTC’s ruling that the generic drug maker engaged in an anticompetitive “reverse payment” settlement with a brand manufacturer (Endo / Impax) New
Hausfeld (Philadelphia)
On April 13, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the Federal Trade Commission’s ruling that generic drug maker Impact Laboratories, LLC (now owned by Amneal Pharmaceuticals) engaged in an anticompetitive “reverse payment” settlement with brand manufacturer Endo (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms the pay-for-delay infringement decision in the pharmaceutical sector (Lundbeck)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 March 2021, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) dismissed all appeals against the 2016 rulings of the General Court which had upheld the European Commission’s (“Commission”) decision to fine Lundbeck and four generic pharmaceutical companies (Merck, Alpharma, Arrow and Ranbaxy) for (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of several manufacturers of medicines and upholds the Commission’s decision regarding a pay-for-delay infringement (Lundbeck)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
On 25 March 2021, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) dismissed the appeals by Lundbeck and five producers of generic medicines against the General Court’s (GC) judgments that upheld the Commission’s decision and the fines it had imposed in its first pay-for-delay infringement decision in 2013. (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of several pharmaceutical companies involved in an agreement seeking to delay the marketing of the generic antidepressant citalopram (Lundbeck)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
The Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of a number of manufacturers of medicines involved in an agreement seeking to delay the marketing of the genericantidepressant citalopram* The European Commission had imposed on them fines of almost € 150 million From the late 1970’s, the Danish (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of several manufacturers of medicines against the General Court’s judgment upholding the Commission’s pay-for-delay infringement decision (Lundbeck)
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
,
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
,
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
On 25 March 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) dismissed the appeals by Lundbeck, Merck KGaA (and Generics UK), Arrow, Alpharma (and Xellia) and Ranbaxy, against the General Court’s (“GC”) judgment upholding the European Commission’s (“Commission”) 2013 pay-for-delay (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms the General Court’s judgment and Commission’s decision on pharmaceutical pay-for-delay agreements (Lundbeck)
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
,
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
,
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
On March 25, 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) ruled on appeal in the Lundbeck case, confirming the previous judgement of the General Court (GC) that upheld the decision of the European Commission (Commission) on pharmaceutical “pay-for-delay” agreements (Case AT.39226 — (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms the decision of the Commission to impose fines on several pharmaceutical companies (Lundbeck)
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
,
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
In the much-anticipated Lundbeck case (i.a. C-591/16 P), the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) on 25th March 2021 confirmed the decision of the European Commission (“Commission”) to impose fines on Lundbeck and several generics companies. The case concerns a pay-for-delay agreement dating back to (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses appeals by several manufacturers of medicines regarding pay-for-delay patent settlement agreements (Lundbeck)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 March 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) dismissed all appeals against the decision of the European Commission (the Commission) to fine Lundbeck and four generic pharmaceutical companies (Alpharma, Arrow, Merck, and Ranbaxy) for concluding “pay-for-delay” patent (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms the judgment of the General Court that the pay-for-delay agreements concluded between originator and generics manufacturers were by-object restrictions (Lundbeck)
Ashurst (Brussels)
The European Court of Justice ("ECJ") confirmed the judgment of the General Court ("GC") upholding the European Commission’s pay-for-delay decision. The ruling held that the originator and generics manufacturers must be considered potential competitors despite Lundbeck’s process patents, and (...)

The Italian Competition Authority opens an investigation on an alleged anticompetitive agreement in the audiovisual market (SIAE)
Bird & Bird (Rome)
,
Bird & Bird (Rome)
On 2 February 2021, the Italian National Competition Authority (“AGCM”) opened an investigation against the Italian Society for Authors and Publishers (“SIAE”) – organisation responsible for the collective management of copyright in Italy – and various trade associations with a view to ascertain the (...)

The UK Competition Authority publishes guidance for businesses on how to participate in sustainability agreements without breaching competition law
Ashurst (London)
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has published guidance for businesses to help them understand how to avoid participation in sustainability agreements raising competition law issues that can have serious consequences for those businesses. Recognising that many sustainability (...)

The US FTC charges two pharmaceutical companies for preventing competition in the national market for oxymorphone (Endo / Impax)
US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Washington)
FTC Again Charges Endo and Impax with Illegally Preventing Competition in U.S. Market for Oxymorphone ER* The FTC is suing Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., Endo International plc, Impax Laboratories, LLC, and Impax’s owner, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., alleging that a 2017 agreement between Endo and (...)

The German Parliament publishes its act against restraints of competition’s 10th amendment introducing a new regulatory framework for access to commercial data under antitrust law
Hogan Lovells (Hamburg)
,
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
"The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data" (The Economist, 6.5.2017). This catchy (albeit not quite accurate) comparison is likely to take the leading position among modern digital markets truisms. It is therefore hardly surprising that the German legislator has been (...)

The Italian Supreme Administrative Court upholds the Competition Authority’s judgment ruling that the allocation of broadcasting rights is not the result of an anticompetitive agreement between companies in the pay-TV sector (League/ Infront / Sky / Mediaset)
Bird & Bird (Rome)
,
Bird & Bird (Rome)
On 28 December 2020, the Italian Supreme Administrative Court (Consiglio di Stato – "CDS") issued a judgment marking the last act in the national judicial dispute related to the assignment of the Lega Serie A (i.e. the main national professional league in Italy – "the League") broadcasting rights (...)

The EU Commission issues the proposed digital markets act aimed to complement antitrust intervention in digital markets with ex-ante regulation in the form of a set of obligations that platforms identified as “gatekeepers” should abide by
CRA International (London)
,
Yale University - School of Management (New Haven)
The European Commission Digital Markets Act: A translation* The European Commission has finally issued the proposed Digital Markets Act, its bid to complement antitrust intervention in digital markets with ex-ante regulation in the form of a set of obligations that platforms identified as (...)

The EU Court of Justice annuls a Commission decision allowing a TV company to preserve competition on the markets of pay-TV services (Paramount / Sky / Groupe Canal +)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
The Court of Justice annuls a Commission decision making binding the commitments offered by a company in order to preserve competition on the markets* The fact that it is possible, for the contracting partners of a company which has made commitments not to comply with certain contractual (...)

The EU Court of Justice annuls the Commission decision that made commitments legally binding for companies in the pay-TV services sector (Paramount / Sky / Groupe Canal +)
Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for International, European and Regulatory Procedural Law
Canal+ (C-132/19 P): The Court of Justice Annuls Commitment Decision – The Importance of Third Party Contractual Rights* Today, the Court of Justice annulled the Commission decision that made commitments legally binding for Paramount. This decision is the first annulment of a commitment (...)

The EU Court of Justice overturns a decision and declares a settlement between a company in the pay-TV service and the Commission null and void (Paramount / Sky / Groupe Canal+)
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
,
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
Settlements are a frequently used means of efficiently terminating proceedings, not only in cartel cases but also in other antitrust proceedings. The EU Commission can avoid having to spend resources on a time-consuming investigation and there are advantages for the companies concerned as well: (...)

The EU Court of Justice annuls a Commission’s decision accepting legally binding commitments offered by a company aimed at addressing an investigation into cross-border pay-TV in the EU (Paramount / Sky / Groupe Canal +)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
On 9 December 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) annulled a European Commission decision accepting legally binding commitments offered by Paramount aimed at addressing a Commission investigation into cross-border pay-TV in the EU (the “Paramount Commitment Decision”). The CJEU also set (...)

The EU Court of Justice annuls the Commission decision on a pay TV service company’s commitments for breaching the principle of proportionality (Paramount / Sky / Groupe Canal +)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
On December 9, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union granted Canal+’s application to annul the European Commission’s decision under Article 9 of Regulation No. 1/2003 to adopt commitments offered by Paramount (the “Commitments Decision”). The commitments prohibited Paramount from (...)

The EU Court of Justice annuls commission’s settlement decision for its failure to consider adverse effects on third party interests (Paramount / Sky / Groupe Canal +)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 9 December 2020, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) upheld Canal +’s appeal against the General Court’s (“GC”) judgment that had upheld the Commission’s commitments decision in the Paramount case, and annulled the GC’s judgment as well as the Commission decision (Case C-132/19 P). The ECJ, (...)

The US FTC publishes its annual report on pharmaceutical patent settlements
White & Case (Washington)
,
White & Case (New York)
,
White & Case (Washington)
On December 3, 2020, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published its annual report on pharmaceutical patent settlements filed with the FTC under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA)—its fourth annual review since the Supreme Court’s seminal decision in (...)

The US FTC issues a FY 2017 report on branded drug firms’ patent settlements with generic competitors
US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Washington)
FTC Staff Issues FY 2017 Report on Branded Drug Firms’ Patent Settlements with Generic Competitors* The number of reverse-payment agreements remains low; for the first time since FY 2004, no agreement contains a no-AG commitment. According to a new FTC staff report, the total number of final (...)

The Chinese SAMR promulgates the Anti-monopoly Guidelines for intellectual property rights providing a more detailed analytical framework for monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant position
King & Wood Mallesons (Beijing)
In 2020, SAMR promulgated the Anti-monopoly Guidelines for Intellectual Property Rights, i.e. IP Guidelines, which provide a more detailed analytical framework for monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position involving intellectual property: Definition of relevant market: The IP (...)

The US District Court for the District of Delaware contradicts the Supreme Court precedent regarding patent settlements in the pharmaceutical sector (Chimicles Schwartz Kriner / Donaldson-Smith / Amgen / Teva / Watson / Actavis)
White & Case (New York)
,
White & Case (Washington)
,
White & Case (Washington)
A Nov. 30 decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, In re: Sensipar Antitrust Litigation, contradicts controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent and, if followed, could have significant implications for patent settlements well outside the pharmaceutical context in which it (...)

The EU Commission fines pharmaceutical companies for pay-for-delay agreement (Teva / Cephalon)
Ashurst (London)
,
Ashurst (London)
On 26 November 2020, the European Commission ("Commission") announced that it had fined the pharmaceutical companies Teva and Cephalon EUR 60.5 million for agreeing to delay for several years the market entry of a cheaper generic version of Cephalon’s drug for sleep disorders, modafinil, after (...)

The EU Commission fines two pharmaceutical companies for pay-for-delay patent settlement agreement (Teva / Cephalon)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 26 November 2020, the European Commission (the Commission) brought to an end a long running competition case by finding against Cephalon and Teva on account of a “pay-for-delay” patent settlement agreement involving modafinil, the active substance of a sleeping disorder medicine (see, attached (...)

The EU Commission fines two pharmaceutical companies €60.5 million for delaying the entry of cheaper generic medicine for sleep disorders (Teva / Cephalon)
DG COMP (Brussels)
Antitrust: Commission fines Teva and Cephalon €60.5 million for delaying entry of cheaper generic medicine* The European Commission has fined the pharmaceutical companies Teva and Cephalon €60.5 million for agreeing to delay for several years the market entry of a cheaper generic version of (...)

The EU Commission adopts an action plan for intellectual property to promote recovery and resilience
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
,
Hogan Lovells (Dusseldorf)
On November 25, 2020, the EU Commission adopted an action plan for intellectual property to promote recovery and resilience in the EU – its plan for a new IP strategy. The focus is not only on the protection of, but the access to innovation. Companies from all sectors have realized that in this (...)

The Mexican Competition Authority proposes 12 measures on economic competition matters to support the recovery of the national economy as a result of the COVID-19 health crisis Free
Mexican Competition Authority (Mexico City)
COFECE proposes 12 measures on economic competition matters to support the recovery of the Mexican economy* As a result of the health crisis, markets could further concentrate. Guaranteeing inclusion and permanence of a wide range of companies is the best way to ensure a sustainable recovery (...)

The UK Supreme Court confirms that English courts may set the terms of global licences to portfolios of standard essential patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Bristows (London)
,
Bristows (London)
English courts given green light to set terms of global FRAND licences* On 26 August 2020, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) gave its eagerly awaited judgment in Unwired Planet v Huawei and Conversant v Huawei & ZTE. In a unanimous policy-driven decision, the Court dismissed the appeals brought (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down a judgement between a software and a telecommunication company, providing answers on questions concerning the English Courts’ approach to FRAND disputes (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Hogan Lovells (London)
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
The UK Supreme Court has handed down its long-awaited judgment in the Unwired Planet v Huawei and Conversant v Huawei & ZTE proceedings ([2020] UKSC 37), providing answers on several key questions concerning the English Courts’ approach to FRAND disputes. In a unanimous judgment, the (...)

The UK Supreme Court confirms that it is possible to set global FRAND rates and global licences to portfolios of standard-essential patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Baker Botts (Brussels)
,
Baker Botts (Brussels)
The U.K. Supreme Court’s 26 August ruling on standard-essential patents (SEPs) is the latest in a series of recent decisions that are likely to have a profound effect on FRAND license negotiations across the globe, in particular for the next generation 4G and 5G mobile telecommunication (...)

The Mannheim Regional Court grants injunctive relief to a telecommunication provider and clarifies the application of FRAND in the supply chain (Daimler / Nokia)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
According to a press release of the Mannheim Regional Court of 18 August 2020 in the matter Nokia v Daimler, the Regional Court of Mannheim (the “Court”) ruled in favour of Nokia that Daimler had infringed Nokia’s patent and could not invoke a FRAND objection. The Court held that Daimler and a (...)

The US DoJ announces that a proposed patent-pooling platform dedicated to 5G cellular technology standards for use in the automotive industry is unlikely to harm competition (Avanci)
Seyfarth Shaw (Boston)
DOJ Antitrust Division Approval of Pooling of “Essential” Standards Will Help Speed Integration of 5G Technology Into New Vehicles* The US Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division recently announced that it has concluded that a proposed patent-pooling platform dedicated to “essential” 5G (...)

The EU Commission starts a market test inviting comments from interested parties on commitments offered by a pharmaceutical company who had abused its dominant position (Aspen)
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
On 14 July 2020 the European Commission started a market test inviting comments from interested parties on commitments offered by Aspen Pharmacare Holdings. The Commission had opened an investigation in May 2017 over concerns that Aspen had abused its dominant position in a range of national (...)

The UK Competition Authority fines 3 pharmaceutical companies £2.3 million for anti-competitive agreement in the supply of life-saving drug fludrocortisone and secures £8 million in damages for the National Health Service (Aspen / Amilco / Tiofarma)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
CMA levies fines of £2.3m and secures £8m for NHS in pharma probe* The CMA has formally concluded that 3 pharmaceutical companies took part in an illegal arrangement in relation to the supply of life-saving medicine. The investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority into the supply of (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismisses antitrust case challenging patent thicket (Humira)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On June 8, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted defendants’ motion to dismiss an antitrust case challenging behavior arising out of a massive collection of patents known as a “patent thicket.” In re Humira (Adalimumab) Antitrust Litigation, 2020 WL 3051309 (...)

The EU Court of Justice Advocate General Kokott proposes to uphold the fine of almost €94 million imposed on a pharmaceutical group in the context of agreements intended to delay the marketing of generic versions of its antidepressant medicinal product citalopram (Lundbeck)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
Advocate General Kokott proposes that the Court of Justice should uphold the fine of almost €94 million imposed on the Lundbeck pharmaceutical group in the context of agreements intended to delay the marketing of generic versions of its antidepressant medicinal product citalopram* The Advocate (...)

The UK Competition Authority secures disqualification of pharmaceutical company director for 5 years for breaching competition law (Amit Patel / Auden McKenzie / Amilco)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
Pharma company director disqualified for competition law breaches* The CMA has secured the disqualification of pharmaceutical company director Amit Patel after he admitted his role in arrangements that broke competition law. Amit Patel has signed undertakings that ban him from holding a (...)

The UK Competition Authority secures binding competition disqualification undertakings by a director involved in two separate anticompetitive arrangements relating to the supply of pharmaceuticals (Amit Patel / Auden McKenzie / Amilco)
Bird & Bird (London)
,
Bird & Bird (London)
On 4 June 2020, the Competition Markets Authority (“CMA”) announced that it had secured binding competition disqualification undertakings by Mr Amit Patel, not to act as a director of any UK company for five years from 13 July 2020, in consequence of his involvement in two separate (...)

The UK High Court rules that complying with a court-ordered disclosure in patent infringement proceedings between pharmaceutical companies does not breach competition law (Teva / Chiesi)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 2 June 2020, the UK High Court delivered a judgment in a case pitting pharmaceutical companies Teva UK Limited (“Teva”) against Chiesi Farmaceutici (“Chiesi”) in which Mr Justice Birss ruled that complying with a court-ordered disclosure in patent infringement proceedings does not breach Article (...)

The Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court rules its first trademark infringement and unfair competition case regarding parallel import, in which it finds such acts should constitute neither trademark infringement nor unfair competition (Opel Electric / Guangdong Shifu Electric)
King & Wood Mallesons (Beijing)
First Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Case regarding Parallel Import Concluded by Guangzhou IP Court* Recently, Guangzhou IP Court ruled on its first trademark infringement and unfair competition case regarding parallel import, in which it found such acts should neither (...)

The German Competition Authority discontinues its administrative proceeding against 2 TV broadcasters who secured exclusive rights to champions league broadcast because of new market entrants and the unpredictability of football season due to COVID-19 (Sky / DAZN) Free
German Competition Authority (Bonn)
Proceeding against Sky and DAZN discontinued – Award procedure relating to Champions League broadcasting rights* Today, the Bundeskartellamt discontinued its proceeding against Sky Ltd., London, and DAZN Group Ltd., London, for discretionary reasons; the proceeding had been conducted due to (...)

The US FTC adds 6 State Attorneys General as co-complainants in suit against anticompetitive scheme to protect list-price increase of more than 4,000 percent for life-saving drug Daraprim (Vyera Pharmaceuticals / Martin Shkreli / Phoenixus / Kevin Mulleady)
US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Washington)
Six More States Join FTC and NY Attorney General’s Case Against Vyera Pharmaceuticals, Martin Shkreli, and Other Defendants* Defendants engaged in anticompetitive scheme to protect list-price increase of more than 4,000 percent for life-saving drug Daraprim The Federal Trade Commission has (...)

The Australian Competition Authority seeks views from parties interested in the allocation and use of the spectrum in the 26-28 gigahertz (GHz) band
Baker McKenzie (Sydney)
,
Baker McKenzie (Sydney)
,
Baker McKenzie (Sydney)
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) seeks views by 27 March 2020 from parties interested in the allocation and use of the spectrum in the 26-28 gigahertz (GHz) band. The spectrum is to be used for 5G technology. Organisations planning to utilise 5G technology may be (...)

The EU Commission fines non-exclusive distribution agreements of IP protected merchandise products (Nike / Sanrio / NBC Universal)
Bird & Bird (Brussels)
,
Bird & Bird (Brussels)
The European rules on vertical restrictions are strongly influenced by the EU’s goal of creating a single market, also for Intellectual Property (‘IP’) protected products. Following its e-commerce sector inquiry, the EC started a number of investigations into non-exclusive distribution agreements (...)

The EU Commission fines a €14.3 million a film and TV production company for restricting intellectual property licensing (NBCUniversal)
Ashurst (Brussels)
,
Ashurst (London)
On 30 January 2020 the European Commission ("Commission") fined NBCUniversal EUR 14,327,000 for restricting intellectual property licensees from selling licensed merchandise within the EEA to territories and customers beyond those allocated to them. WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW - KEY TAKEAWAYS (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the criteria for the pay-for-delay agreements in the pharmaceutical sector (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
On 30 January 2020 the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) clarified for the first time the criteria governing whether so-called “pay-for-delay” agreements entered into between originator and generic pharmaceutical companies fall foul of EU competition law rules. Such agreements are a form of patent (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that pay-for-delay patent settlements may restrict competition by object (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “ECJ”) handed down its judgment in Case C-307/18, Generics (UK) and Others. This case marks the first time the ECJ has ruled on patent settlement agree- ments between originator pharmaceutical companies and generic producers. (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the conditions under which pay-for-delay agreements preventing generic versions of a patented medicine from entering the market or delaying such entry may constitute a restriction of competition ‘by object’ or ‘by effect” as well as an abuse of dominant position (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
University of Liège
,
University of Liège
On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU (‘CJEU’) ruled on the applicability of competition law to settlement agreements between a holder of a pharmaceutical patent and manufacturers of generic medicines. In a judgment issued only a week after Advocate General Kokott delivered her (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies for the first time when patent settlement agreements that restrict a generic pharmaceutical company’s ability to enter the market infringe the EU antitrust rules (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Baker Botts (Brussels)
,
Baker Botts (Brussels)
,
Baker Botts (Brussels)
In a major judgment handed down on 30 January 2020 in Generics (UK) and Others, the EU Court of Justice (the Court) – the EU’s highest court – clarified for the first time the analytical framework for assessing when patent settlement agreements that restrict a generic pharmaceutical company’s (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the conditions for a pay-for-delay agreement to be qualified as a restriction of competition by object (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Ashurst (Brussels)
On 30 January 2020 (case C-307/18), the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") issued a preliminary ruling that sheds more light on the circumstances in which an agreement settling a patent dispute between a pharmaceutical patent holder and a company intending to launch a competing generic product (...)

The EU Court of Justice renders a preliminary ruling stating that a dispute between an originator and a generics manufacturer constitutes evidence that they are potential competitors (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU rendered its preliminary ruling in Case C-307/18 – Generics (UK) and Others v CMA (Paroxetine). The case originated in a preliminary reference made by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) relating to an appeal against a decision of the UK (...)

The EU Court of Justice provides guidance on patent settlements between manufacturers of the originator and generic medicines (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Hausfeld (London)
,
Hausfeld (Berlin)
On 30 January 2020, the European Court of Justice released its judgment relating to a patent dispute between the pharmaceutical patent-holder, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), and a generic drug maker concluding that originators and generics are in fact “potential competitors” if the generic drugmaker has (...)

The EU Commission fines €14.3 million a film production company for restricting the sale of merchandising products (NBCUniversal)
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
On 30 January 2020, the European Commission fined NBCUniversal EUR14,3 million for restricting intellectual property licensees from selling licensed merchandise within the EEA to territories and customers beyond those allocated to them. The Commission found that for over six and a half years, (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies that when patent settlement agreements restrict a generic pharmaceutical company’s ability to enter the market they infringe EU antitrust rules (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Bird & Bird (Brussels)
,
Bird & Bird (Brussels)
Article summary: Settlement Agreements Can Be Anti-Competitive Only If The Involved Companies Are (At Least) Potential Competitors. A Careful Examination Must Determine Whether A Generic Manufacturer Would Have Entered Into The Market Without A "Pay Per Delay" Agreement. The Classification Of (...)

The Belgian Competition Authority carries out an unannounced inspection in the pharmaceutical sector
Belgian Competition Authority (Brussels)
The Belgian Competition Authority is conducting inspections in the pharmaceutical sector* The Investigation and Prosecution Service of the Belgian Competition Authority (BCA) is currently conducting inspections at the premises of companies suspected of having implemented restrictive practices (...)

The US State of California becomes the first State to enact legislation rendering certain pharmaceutical patent litigation settlement agreements presumptively anticompetitive
White & Case (Washington)
,
White & Case (Washington)
,
White & Case (New York)
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On October 7, 2019, California became the first state to enact legislation— Assembly Bill 824 (“AB 824”)—rendering certain pharmaceutical patent litigation settlement (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California rules that an automotive company breaches FRAND commitments for the standard essential patents it was offering to license (Continental / Avanci)
Ropes & Gray (New York)
,
Ropes & Gray (New York)
,
Ropes & Gray (New York)
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. As new devices become wirelessly connected, the importance of fairly licensing cellular standard essential patents (SEPs) has become increasingly important. This (...)

The UK Competition Authority issues a statement of objections to three pharmaceutical companies over pay-for-delay agreements (Aspen / Amilco / Tiofarma)
Bird & Bird (Amsterdam)
,
Bird & Bird (London)
On 3 October 2019 the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) issued a Statement of Objections (the “SO”) to three pharmaceutical companies over pay-for-delay agreements in the market for Addison’s disease treatment. In its SO the CMA sets out its provisional view that, in 2016, pharmaceutical (...)

The US Patent and Trademark Office Director calls for a balanced and structured policy for patent licensing negotiations in standards organizations
Rutgers University (Camden)
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Standards allow companies to build compatible products. But they often include patents. And patents present complex issues. Licensors agree to reasonably license (...)

The Australian Parliament passes a repeal of subsection 51(3) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010
Jones Day (Sydney)
,
Jones Day (Sydney)
Both houses of the Australian Parliament have passed a repeal of subsection 51(3) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ("CCA"). Following the repeal, owners of intellectual property rights in Australia must comply with certain competition rules from which they previously enjoyed an (...)

The Barcelona Court of Appeal applies a narrow reading of the exhaustion principle to trade marks with common origin (Schweppes)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 22 July 2019, the Barcelona Court of Appeal (“Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona”) delivered a judgment on an appeal by Schweppes SA (“Schweppes”) against a judgment of the Commercial Court of Barcelona in which it held that the evidence provided by Red Paralela, a parallel importer, was (...)

The EU Commission fines a Japanese retail and designs company for restricting cross-border sales and online sales (Sanrio)
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
On 9 July 2019, the Commission fined Sanrio, a Japanese company that designs, produces and sells “Hello Kitty” products, EUR6.2 million for breaching Article 101 TFEU by imposing territorial restrictions on cross-border and online sales of merchandising products featuring Hello Kitty and other (...)

The EU Commission fines a company for restricting cross-border sales of merchandising products (Sanrio)
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo (Brussels)
,
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo (Brussels)
,
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo (Brussels)
The investigation of the Commission has found that Sanrio banned traders from selling licensed merchandise of Hello Kitty and other characters outside their territorial coverage but within the European Economic Area (“EEA”). Sanrio is a Japanese company that designs, licenses, produces and sells (...)

The Shanghai IP Court holds that fictitiously increasing the number of views of videos is an act of false propaganda (Feiyi / IQiYi)
Beijing Foreign Studies University (Beijing)
From the perspective of anti-unfair competition law, Feiyi Company fictitiously increased the video visits of IQiYi’s website by technical means - the first case of inflating traffic on video websites in China. In recent years, the excessive pursuit of traffic in the Internet industry has (...)

The Hague Court of Appeal delivers its judgment on an alleged infringement of patent essential to the universal mobile telecommunications system standard (Asus / Philips)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 7 May 2019, the Court of Appeal of the Hague delivered its judgment in a case pitting Philips against ASUS regarding the alleged infringement of Philips’ European patent EP 1 623 511, which was considered essential to the High Speed Uplink Packet Access (“HSUPA”) protocol of the Universal (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal delivers the first judgement on FRAND terms and applies the French legislation implementing the trade secrets directive (Conversant / LG)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 16 April 2019, the Paris Court of Appeal delivered a judgment in Conversant v. LG, a case dealing with the concept of licensing under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms. While the court did not set a much-anticipated FRAND royalty rate, the case is noteworthy because of (...)

The US FTC concludes that a pharma company entered into an illegal pay-for-delay agreement (Endo / Impax)
Hausfeld (Philadelphia)
,
Hausfeld (Washington)
On March 28, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a landmark opinion in the agency’s case against Impax Laboratories Inc. regarding its patent settlement with Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., marking the first time that the Commission has weighed in on the proper application of (...)

The US FTC reverses Administrative Law Judge decision, finding Section 5 violation for reverse-payment settlement (Endo / Impax)
Rutgers University (Camden)
In FTC v. Actavis, the Supreme Court ruled that settlements by which brand drug companies pay generics to delay entering the market could violate antitrust law. In In the Matter of Impax Laboratories, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) offered its first elaboration upon this (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois receives a class action complaint against a pay-for-delay agreement (Abbvie)
Constantine Cannon (Washington)
Plaintiffs Targeting Biologic-Biosimilars Settlements with Pay-for-Delay Antitrust Claims* Antitrust principles that can invalidate certain pay-for-delay settlements will be expanding into the new frontier of biologic and biosimilar drugs if plaintiffs in several new suits are successful. (...)

The EU Commission accepts final commitments in a cross-border access to pay-TV case (Disney / NBC Universal / Sony Pictures / Warner Bros / Sky)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
According to a press release issued on 7 March 2019, the European Commission (“Commission”) has formally accepted the commitments offered by Disney, NBC Universal, Sony Pictures, Warner Bros. and Sky in Case 40.023, Cross-border access to pay-TV, under Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003. The (...)

The EU Commission issues a report on competition enforcement in the pharmaceutical sector covering the years 2009-2017
DG COMP (Brussels)
Report on Competition enforcement in the pharmaceutical sector (2009-2017)* On 28 January 2019, the European Commission adopted the Report ‘European competition authorities working together for affordable and innovative medicines’ on competition enforcement in the pharmaceutical sector. The (...)

The EU Commission publishes a report on competition enforcement in the pharmaceutical sector between 2009 and 2017
Court of First Instance of Namur (Namur)
On 28 January 2019, the European Commission adopted a report on competition enforcement in the pharmaceutical sector between 2009 and 2017. The report provides an overview on the enforcement of antitrust and merger rules in the pharmaceutical sector and describes how competition law enforcement (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas holds that FRAND commitment does not require licensing at chip level (HTC / Telefonaktiebolaget / Ericsson)
Sullivan & Cromwell (New York)
,
Sullivan & Cromwell (Palo Alto)
,
Sullivan & Cromwell (New York)
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. SUMMARY On January 7, 2019, in HTC Corp. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (...)

The EU General Court annuls a decision of the Commission for wrongly qualifying agreements as "pay for delay" and improperly qualifying an abuse of dominance, thus reducing the fine imposed on a pharmaceutical company (Servier)
Dechert (Paris)
,
Dechert (Paris)
,
Dechert (Paris)
The General Court annuls in part the European Commission’s decision finding the existence of restrictive agreements and an abuse of a dominant position on the market for perindopril, a medicine used to treat hypertension and heart failure* On 12 December 2018, the General Court (“Court”) (...)

The EU General Court holds that patent settlements may be deemed pay-for-delay agreements only if there are reverse payments, and the originator may not be held dominant if the market is not assessed rigorously (Servier)
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
The Servier judgments: patent settlements may be deemed “pay-for-delay” agreements, and thus by-object infringements of Article 101 TFEU only if Commission substantiates strong indication of “reverse payment” or “abnormal inducement” from the originator to the generic; further, the originator cannot (...)

The EU General Court offers a mixed review of patent settlement agreements in the pharmaceutical sector (Servier)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 12 December 2018, the General Court (“GC”) once again passed judgment on a number of patent settlement agreements in the pharmaceutical sector. It had already reviewed such agreements in September 2016 when it upheld the decision of the European Commission (the “Commission”) in the Lundbeck (...)

The EU General Court rules that pay-for-delay patent settlements can be illegal agreements but annuls abuse of dominance finding (Servier)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
,
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
,
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (Rome)
The General Court has given eight judgments on a Commission fining decision concerning patent settlements entered into by Servier and five competitor producers of generic drugs, reducing the fines from a total of € 428 million to € 315 million. The Court broadly upheld the fines based on Article (...)

The EU General Court rules that territorial exclusivity clauses in copyright licensing agreements raise competition concerns (Canal+)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 12 December 2018, the EU General Court (“GC” or “Court”) dismissed the application for annulment which Canal + SA (“Canal +”) had brought against a European Commission (“Commission”) decision that had made commitments offered by Paramount Pictures Ltd (“Paramount”) in the context of copyright (...)

The Shanghai Intellectual Property Court determines whether there are protectable interests and concludes that the degree of damage suffered by the plaintiff is not enough to meet the need for relief through the anti-unfair competition law (Beijing iQIYI Technology / Beijing Sogou Information)
Beijing Foreign Studies University (Beijing)
The Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People’s Republic of China stipulates seven types of unfair competition, namely, label confusion (Article 6), commercial bribery (Article 7), misleading statements (Article 8), infringement on trade secrets (Article 9), improper prize-winning sales (Article (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas declares that a licensing offer based on end-device is compliant with FRAND commitments (HTC / Ericsson)
Crowell & Moring (Washington)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
Standard-essential patent holders and implementers may face uncertainty regarding licensing practices following a May 23 Texas court ruling. In the ruling, a Texas federal judge reached a conclusion different from a recent California court decision — FTC v. Qualcomm — on the question of whether (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal grants an application by the claimant in a damages action in the automobile industry for disclosure of licensing arrangements made by the defendant (Peugeot / NSK)
Latham & Watkins (London)
,
Matheson (Dublin)
This article has been nominated for the 2019 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. CAT Rules on Disclosure in Peugeot S.A. and others v NSK Ltd and others* The CAT’s specific disclosure ruling addresses the use of licensing to support (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies exhaustion of trademark principles and broadens the interpretation of economic links between trademark owners (Schweppes / Red Paralela)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 20 December 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) handed down its judgment in Case C-291/16 Schweppes v Red Paralela and Others. The ECJ held that the owner of a trademark may not oppose the parallel importation of goods bearing an identical trademark but originating in (...)

The EU Court of Justice recalls the function of trademark and clarifies the criteria of exhaustion of trademark principle (Schweppes / Red Paralela)
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
In its Judgment of 20 December 2017, the ECJ has ruled that Schweppes Spain may not oppose the import of bottles of tonic water under the trademark “Schweppes” imported from the UK. By way of background, Schweppes International or Schweppes Holding (Orangina Schweppes) is the proprietor of the (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upholds dismissal of an antitrust suit where a jury verdict in a parallel case found no patent infringement (Casacade Computer / RPX / Samsung)
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
,
Crowell & Moring (Washington)
What Happened: Wading into the merging streams of antitrust and patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld dismissal of an antitrust suit where a jury verdict in a parallel case found no patent infringement. Cascades Computer Innovation, LLC v. RPX Corp. and Samsung (...)

The EU Commission sends statements of objection for alleged pay-for-delay agreement (Teva / Cephalon)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 17 July 2017, the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections against pharmaceutical companies Teva and Cephalon (which is now a subsidiary of Teva) alleging that Teva breached Article 101 TFEU by concluding an agreement with Cephalon not to market a cheaper generic version of a (...)

The EU Commission sends a statement of objection to a pharmaceutical company regarding a possible pay-for-delay agreement (Teva / Cephalon)
DG COMP (Brussels)
Antitrust: Commission sends Statement of Objections to Teva on ’pay for delay’ pharma agreement* The European Commission has informed pharmaceutical company Teva of its preliminary view that an agreement concluded with Cephalon was in breach of EU antitrust rules. Under the agreement, Teva (...)

The EU Commission publishes its final e-commerce sector inquiry report
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 10 May 2017, the European Commission (“Commission”) published its final Report on the e-commerce sector inquiry (“the Report”), aimed at identifying business practices in the sector that might restrict competition and limit consumer choice. The Report consists of two documents: (i) a 16-page (...)

The EU Commission publishes its final report on the inquiry into the e-commerce sector
Dentons (Brussels)
,
DLA Piper (London)
,
DLA Piper (Amsterdam)
On 10 May 2017, DG Competition of the European Commission (the "Commission") published its final report on the inquiry into the e-commerce sector (launched in May 2015 as part of the Digital Single Market strategy). The findings in the report are based on information gathered from 1,900 (...)

The U.S. FTC and DOJ publish revised antitrust guidelines for the licensing of intellectual property
Weil, Gotshal & Manges (New York)
,
Weil, Gotshal & Manges (Washington)
FTC and DOJ finalize revised Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property* On January 12, 2017 the DOJ and FTC jointly issued final updated Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (Updated IP Guidelines). Acting Assistant Attorney General Renata (...)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit holds that the invocation of intellectual property rights is a presumptively valid business justification sufficient to rebut a refusal to deal antitrust claim (Solidfx / Jeppesen Sanderson)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Rome)
Tenth Circuit holds IPRs defense available to rebut a refusal to deal antitrust claim* On 31 October 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (the “Court of Appeals”) held that the invocation of IPRs is a presumptively valid business justification sufficient to rebut a (...)

The US Federal Trade Commission issues report on patent assertion entities
Rutgers University (Camden)
On October 6, 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its long-awaited report on patent assertion entities (PAEs). Sometimes called “patent trolls,” these actors have elicited fierce debate, with critics lamenting their ability to demand ransom money and hold up an industry while (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit offers misguided analysis of product hopping (Mayne / Warner Chilcott / Mylan)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On September 28, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a misguided ruling granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment and ignoring the regulatory framework relevant to “product hopping,” by which a drug company switches from one version of a drug to another, sometimes (...)

The EU General Court upholds the EU Commission’s landmark patent settlement agreement decision (Lundbeck)
Sidley Austin (London)
,
Willkie Farr & Gallagher (London)
EU General Court upholds Commission’s landmark Patent Settlement Agreement decision* In a much-anticipated series of judgments, running to some 579 pages, the EU’s General Court on 8 September 2016 upheld a 2013 decision of the European Commission that imposed fines of almost €150 million on the (...)

The EU General Court confirms the Commission’s decision concerning its first pharma pay-for-delay case (Lundbeck)
University of East Anglia (Norwich)
General Court’s pay for delay judgment in Lundbeck – some guidance, but worries remain*On 8 September, the General Court handed down its eagerly awaited decision in Lundbeck – the first ever European judgment concerning so-called pay for delay settlements. The Commission’s decision in this case was (...)

The EU General Court confirms the EU Commission’s decision concerning its first pharma pay-for-delay case (Lundbeck)
DG COMP (Brussels)
Antitrust: Commission welcomes General Court judgments upholding its Lundbeck decision in first pharma pay-for-delay case Today the General Court upheld the Commission’s Lundbeck decision and ruled for the first time that pharma pay-for-delay agreements breach EU antitrust rules. In such (...)

The EU General Court rules on the legitimacy of settlement agreements in the pharmaceutical sector (Lundbeck)
Peters & Peters (London)
,
Peters & Peters (London)
Lundbeck - Buying off the competition* On 8 September 2016, the ECJ handed down its judgment in the latest battle between pharmaceutical companies and competition authorities over “pay for delay” agreements. The appeal of H Lundbeck A/S and Lundbeck Ltd (together “Lundbeck”) against the decision (...)

The EU General Court upholds the EU Commission’s fine of €150 million on undertakings for entering into reverse settlement agreements which delayed the entry of cheaper generic versions of a blockbuster antidepressant (Lundbeck)
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
EU COURT CONFIRMS EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S DECISION ON PAY-FOR-DELAY AGREEMENTS* On 8 September 2016, the General Court of the European Union upheld the European Commission’s decision in which the antitrust regulator imposed fines of approximately EUR 150 million on Lundbeck and a number of generic (...)

The EU General Court confirms fines imposed on an undertaking and generic drug manufacturers for entering into anticompetitive pay-for-delay agreements (Lundbeck)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
GENERAL COURT OF THE EU CONFIRMS FINES IMPOSED ON LUNDBECK AND GENERIC DRUG MANUFACTURERS FOR ENTERING INTO PATENT SETTLEMENTS* On 8 September 2016, the General Court of the EU (GCEU) handed down five judgments upholding a decision by the Commission of 19 June 2013 imposing fines on Lundbeck, (...)

The EU General Court hands down a judgment concerning an appeal brought by an undertaking and several generic companies against an EU Commission decision which found that the parties had breached Article 101 TFEU by agreeing to delay the market entry of a generic drug (Lundbeck)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
On 8 September 2016 the General Court (GC) handed down its judgments in relation to the appeals brought by Lundbeck and a number of generic companies (Sun Pharma (Ranbaxy), Arrow, Generics UK, Merck and Xellia/Alpharma) against a European Commission (Commission) decision finding that the (...)

The EU Commission accepts commitments that correct passive sales restrictions caused by geo-blocking of audio-visual content (Paramount)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 26 July 2016, the Commission made legally binding the commitments offered by Paramount Pictures (“Paramount”) as it considered that they adequately addressed its concerns regarding specific contractual clauses restricting passive sales. In July 2015, the Commission had expressed concerns that (...)

The EU Commission accepts commitments on geo-blocking practices restricting passive sales of audio-visual content (Paramount)
Fieldfisher (London)
Territorial restrictions in media content licensing – lessons from the Paramount commitments decision* The European Commission’s battle against territorial restrictions in media content licences continues on a number of fronts. One of those is an investigation launched in January 2014 into (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that payment of royalties under a licence agreement where the patent was held invalid may be compatible with Article 101 TFEU (Genentech / Hoechst)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
License fees, invalid patents and Article 101 TFEU: Genentech v Hoechst and Sanofi Aventis* Consider an agreement under which a license fee is payable for use of a patented technology even if it transpires that the patent is invalid. Is such an agreement contrary to Article 101 TFEU? The answer (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that royalties for unpatented technology are not necessarily anticompetitive (Genentech)
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
EU COURT RULES THAT ROYALTIES FOR UNPATENTED TECHNOLOGY ARE NOT NECESSARILY ANTICOMPETITIVE* On 7 July 2016, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down a judgment on whether Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) must be interpreted as (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that payment of royalties under a licence agreement where the patent was held invalid may be compatible with Article 101 TFEU (Genentech / Hoechst)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 7 July 2016, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “ECJ”) issued its judgment on a request for a preliminary ruling from the Paris Court of Appeal, which had enquired whether Article 101 TFEU precludes a licensee from paying royalties pursuant to a licensing agreement when the patent (...)

The UK Court of Appeal overturns a UK Patents Court decision and allows competition law arguments in a FRAND dispute in relation to Standard Essential Patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei / Samsung / Ericsson)
Monckton Chambers (London)
,
Monckton Chambers (London)
,
Monckton Chambers (London)
Court of Appeal reinstates Samsung’s case on non-discrimination and FRAND*On Friday 27 May, the Court of Appeal handed down an important judgment on the interplay between competition law and the licensing of essential patents.This is part of a landmark patent infringement case where Unwired (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority fines the national radio broadcasting association for making collective recommendations to its members with anticompetitive effect (AERC)
European Commission (Brussels)
The CNMC fines the Spanish Commercial Radio Broadcasting Association (Asociación Española de Radiodifusión Comercial, AERC) 190,000 euros* Madrid, 21 April 2016. - The CNMC has fined the Spanish Commercial Radio Broadcasting Association (Asociación Española de Radiodifusión Comercial: AERC) for (...)

Advocate General Wathelet concludes that payment of royalties under a licence agreement where the patent was held invalid may be compatible with Article 101 TFEU (Genentech / Hoechst)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 17 March 2016, Advocate General Wathelet issued his opinion on a request for a preliminary ruling from the Paris Court of Appeal, which inquired as to whether Article 101 TFEU precludes a licensee from paying royalties pursuant to a licensing agreement when the patent, which is the subject (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concludes that a reverse payment need not be in cash (Loestrin)
Crowell & Moring (New York)
First Circuit boosts antitrust challenges to pay-for-delay settlements by finding non-cash deals subject to Actavis scrutiny*Antitrust challenges to so-called “pay-for-delay” settlements—in which brand-name drug makers temporarily keep generics out of the market by making payments to would-be (...)

The US FTC urges the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to hold that a reverse payment need not be in cash (Loestrin)
DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach (Vienna)
U.S. FTC urges the Appeals Court to revive the Loestrin Suit* On December 7, 2015, during oral argument, the U.S. FTC urged the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to revive the Loestrin suit. The case concerns a so-called reverse payment settlement. In 2009 Watson Pharmaceuticals agreed (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concludes that a reverse payment need not be in cash (Loestrin)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On February 22, 2016, in the second federal appellate drug patent settlement ruling since the Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit vacated a lower court decision granting a motion to dismiss for defendants. Writing (...)

The UK Competition Authority fines pharmaceutical companies for pay-for-delay deals (GlaxoSmithKline)
Constantine Cannon (London)
,
Constantine Cannon (London)
UK Antitrust Watchdog slaps $65 million fine on Pharma Companies in UK’s first pay-for-delay case* On 12 February 2016, the Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”), UK’s competition regulator, fined a number of pharma companies for anti-competitive conduct and agreements in relation to the supply (...)

The UK Competition Authority fines £45 million to several pharmaceutical companies for pay-for-delay settlements (GlaxoSmithKline)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
CMA fines pharma companies £45 million* The CMA has fined a number of pharmaceutical companies for anti-competitive conduct and agreements in relation to the supply of paroxetine. The CMA’s decision relates to conduct and agreements between 2001 and 2004 in which GlaxoSmithKline plc (GSK), the (...)

The Competition Commission of India finds prima facie case for abuse of dominance and anti-competitive terms in technology licensing agreement (Mahyco Monsanto Biotech)
Tata Institute of Social Sciences (Mumbai)
Background Reference from Ministry of Agriculture and separate complaint from Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd and certain other seed companies alleging abuse of dominant position and anti-competitive practices in Bt-cotton technology licensing process by Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (MMB) has led to this prima (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority fines two IP rights collecting societies for abuse of dominance (AGEDI / AIE RADIO)
European Commission (Brussels)
CNMC fines two intellectual property rights collecting societies* The Spanish Competition Authority, CNMC (National Commission for Markets and Competition), sanctioned two intellectual property rights collecting societies for abusing their dominant position on the management of intellectual (...)

The Chinese NDRC and the Chongqing AIC take separate actions to punish cartel conduct and refusal to supply in the pharmaceutical industry (Allopurinol)
University of Melbourne
,
China Competition Bulletin (Beijing)
,
Hogan Lovells (Beijing)
Both the NDRC and the Chongqing Administration for Industry and Commerce (Chongqing AIC) have recently taken enforcement action to address anticompetitive conduct involving allopurinol. Allopurinol tablets are a common treatment for gout (known as hyperuricemia), widely used in clinical (...)

The US District Court for the Southern District of New York dismisses a lawsuit over patent settlement where generics were granted early-entry licenses with acceleration clauses (Takeda Pharmaceuticals)
Siemens (New York)
,
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Better Early than Never: SDNY Dismisses Lawsuit over Patent Settlement where Generics were Granted Early-Entry Licenses with Acceleration Clauses* On September 22, Judge Ronnie Abrams of the Southern District of New York dismissed an antitrust lawsuit against Takeda Pharmaceuticals and three (...)

The EU Commission issues a statement of objection against companies offering pay-TV services for geographical market sharing (Disney / NBCUniversal / Paramount Pictures / Sony / Twentieth Century Fox / Warner Bros)
University of East Anglia (Norwich)
The European Commission’s Battle Over Pay-TV Services: Can Segmenting the EU Market Be Justified?* Yesterday the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections to Sky UK and six major US film studios, taking the preliminary view that restrictions put in place to prevent consumers located (...)

The UK Patents Courts considers Articles 101 and 102 TFEU in FRAND dispute relating to standard essential patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei / Samsung / Google / Ericsson)
European University Institute (Florence)
Give us a FRAND: Unwired Planet v Huawei & Samsung*On 29 January, Mr Justice Birss gave judgment in the second UK patent trial between Unwired Planet, Samsung and Huawei, holding that two of Unwired Planet’s patents are invalid for obviousness. The case concerns patents that were declared (...)

The UK Court of Appeal allows appeal from UK Patents Court decision on competition law arguments in a FRAND dispute in relation to standard essential patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei / Samsung / Ericsson)
Taylor Wessing (London)
Unwired Planet v Huawei & Samsung: Samsung Given Permission To Appeal Strike Out*Summary Unwired Planet asserts that Samsung and Huawei have infringed several ’standard essential patents’ (SEPs) relevant to mobile telecommunications standards. Samsung and Huawei have defended the claims based (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California upholds assignment of antitrust claims to indirect purchasers (United Food / Teikoku Pharma)
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
,
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Northern District of California Upholds Assignment of Antitrust Claims to Indirect Purchasers* Portions of a reverse payment suit against Endo Pharmaceuticals and others were recently dismissed by Judge William H. Orrick of the Northern District of California. The case [1] was brought by (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concludes that the Actavis ruling applies to non-cash payments (Lamictal)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On June 26, 2015, in the first federal appellate drug patent settlement ruling since the Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit overturned a lower court decision granting a motion to dismiss for defendants. Writing for (...)

A U.S. appellate panel questions whether reverse payments need to be in cash to put the patent settlement under the scrutiny of antitrust laws (GlaxoSmithKline)
DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach (Vienna)
Reverse payments can be non-cash according to appellate judges* On 19 November 2014 in a hearing regarding the possible reopening of a lawsuit over whether GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) unfairly extended the monopoly on its drug Lamictal, an appellate panel of the Third Circuit suggested that reverse (...)

The US Supreme Court reaffirms the rule precluding patent owners from collecting patent royalties on expired patents (Kimble / Marvel)
Constantine Cannon (Washington)
Supreme Court Cites Spiderman In Ruling Against Post-Expiration Patent Royalties* Spiderman swung through the halls of the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday as Justice Elena Kagan liberally relied on the comic book superhero in the Court’s decision in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc., reaffirming (...)

The Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia rejects a challenge to an FTC rule that makes the HSR Act reporting requirements cover pharmaceutical patent licenses that transfer all commercially significant rights (PhRMA)
Jones Day (Washington DC)
,
Sheppard Mullin (Washington)
,
Jones Day (Chicago)
The D.C. Circuit has rejected a challenge by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America ("PhRMA") to an FTC rule that makes the HSR Act reporting requirements cover pharmaceutical patent licenses that transfer "all commercially significant rights." The rule, adopted in 2013, (...)

The US FTC reaches a settlement with a pharmaceutical company in a reverse payment case (Cephalon)
Gibson Dunn (Washington)
,
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (San Francisco)
,
Debevoise & Plimpton (Washington, D.C.)
This article has been nominated for the 2016 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has reached a settlement resolving its claims that Cephalon, Inc. violated the antitrust laws by entering into reverse payment (...)

The US FTC reaches a settlement with a pharmaceutical company and continues its march “to set a standard for the industry” in pay-for-delay settlement cases (Cephalon)
Sheppard Mullin (San Francisco)
,
Sterlington
Federal Trade Commission Continues March “to Set a Standard for the Industry” with Cephalon Settlement* On May 28, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced it had reached a $1.2 billion settlement with Teva Pharmaceuticals, which acquired Cephalon in 2012, over reverse payment for its (...)

The US FTC reaches a record $1.2 billion proposed pay-for-delay settlement and injunctive relief restricting future similar settlements of patent infringement cases (Cephalon)
Weil, Gotshal & Manges (New York)
,
Weil, Gotshal & Manges (New York)
Federal Trade Commission Reaches Record $1.2 Billion Proposed “Pay for Delay” Settlement with Cephalon and Injunctive Relief Restricting Future Similar Settlements of Patent Infringement Cases* Last week, on the eve of trial, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) reached a proposed settlement in (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addresses pharmaceutical “product hopping” in decision barring a producer from pulling older version of drug from shelves (Actavis)
Winston & Strawn (Washington)
,
Winston & Strawn (Washington)
Few courts have addressed antitrust challenges to pharmaceutical “product hopping,” i.e., the practice of shifting customers from a drug nearing the end of its patent protection to a modified version that is covered by newer patents and thus is protected from generic competition for a longer (...)

The Californian Supreme Court crafts a structured rule of reason test for evaluating pay-for-delay settlements (Cipro)
Siemens (New York)
,
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Following Actavis, California Supreme Court Crafts “Structured Rule of Reason” Test for Evaluating Pay-for-Delay Settlements* Last Thursday the Supreme Court of California decided In re Cipro Cases I & II, No. S198616 (Cal. May 7, 2015), holding that reverse payment, or “pay-for-delay,” (...)

The Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority and the Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economy jointly explore potential need to develop national law regarding digital business and commerce
University of Helsinki
The Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority (FCCA) and the Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economy (FMEE) have published a press release and a memo about launching a study on digital business and commerce from the standpoint of assessing whether the need exists to better adapt (...)

The Californian Supreme Court delineates a structured rule of reason analysis for evaluating reverse payments or pay-for-delay settlements (Cipro)
Sheppard Mullin (San Francisco)
,
Sterlington
California Supreme Court Delineates a Structured Rule of Reason Analysis for Evaluating Reverse Payment or Pay-for-Delay Settlements* On May 7, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in In re Cipro Cases I & II, Case No. S198616 (May 7, 2015) (Cipro). Cipro (...)

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania holds that a firm which has engaged in fraud on the patent office cannot stand on its patent to defend reverse payment antitrust claims (Cephalon)
Sheppard Mullin (San Francisco)
,
Sheppard Mullin (Washington)
Last year in a landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled that pharmaceutical “reverse payment” settlements in Hatch-Waxman Act “Paragraph 4” patent litigation are subject to challenge, departing from the rule that most Circuits had adopted. FTC v. Actavis, 133 S.Ct. 2223 (2013). In these cases, (...)

The Chinese State Administration for Industry and Commerce publishes guidelines on application of the anti-monopoly law to intellectual property rights
Jones Day (Beijing)
,
Gibson Dunn (Hong Kong)
,
Jones Day (Beijing)
After years of discussions, China’s State Administration for Industry and Commerce finally has released its guidelines on the application of the PRC Anti-Monopoly Law ("AML") to intellectual property rights ("Guidelines"). The Guidelines will come into force on August 1, 2015. The Guidelines (...)

The US Supreme Court hears arguments before the decision on whether post-expiration license royalty obligations are caught in the web of patent policies or antitrust analysis (Kimble / Marvel)
Constantine Cannon (Washington)
Supreme Court Seeks To Untangle Patent And Antitrust Principles Caught In Spider-Man’s Web* The Supreme Court heard oral argument today on whether litigation over a toy based on Spider-Man’s web should be used to vanquish a 50-year-old precedent precluding patent owners from collecting patent (...)

A U.S. District Court rejects an antitrust claim for lack of standing (Spinelli / NFL)
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
,
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
,
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Court Sacks Photographers’ Antitrust Claims Against the NFL and its Member Teams* Allegations of conspiracy to restrain trade and exclusive dealing may read like textbook antitrust claims, but if the allegations are made by a plaintiff who is not an “efficient enforcer” of the antitrust laws, the (...)

Intellectual property and antitrust: An overview of EU and national case law
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
The interaction between competition rules and intellectual property (“IP”) rights continues to be the source of lively debates in Brussels and other capitals across the globe. IP lawyers lament that competition lawyers do not understand IP rules and that competition intervention undermines the (...)

The US DoJ allows a standards association’s new patent policy for wi-fi standards, finding it potentially pro-competitive (IEEE)
Constantine Cannon (Washington)
Feds Green-Light Institute’s New Patent Policy For Wi-Fi Standards, Finding It Potentially Procompetitive* The Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice announced on Monday that it would not challenge recent revisions to the Patent Policy of the Institute of Electrical and (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania sends a second reverse-payment case to trial (Cephalon)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On January 28, 2015, Judge Mitchell Goldberg of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied defendants’ summary judgment motions, sending the second reverse-payment-settlement case to trial. In King Drug Company of Florence v. Cephalon, 2015 WL 356913 (E.D. Pa. Jan. (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania holds the practice of a pharmaceutical company that does not require plaintiffs to meet any “threshold burden” in establishing a large reverse payment as unjustified in triggering analysis under antitrust rules of reason (Cephalon)
Labaton Sucharow (New York)
,
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Washington)
In re Modafinil Litigation Finds No “Threshold Burden” in Reverse Payment Suit* On Wednesday, January 28, in King Drug Company of Florence, Inc. v. Cephalon, Inc. (In re Modafinil), the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013), (...)

The US Supreme Court redefines the standard of appellate review for claim construction (Teva)
White & Case (Palo Alto)
,
White & Case (Palo Alto)
On January 20, 2015, the United States Supreme Court redefined the standard of appellate review for claim construction. In Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court vacated well-established Federal Circuit precedent that applied de novo review to all aspects of claim (...)

The Electronic Intellectual Property Center of China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) releases a draft “Template for Intellectual Property Policies in Industry Standardization Organizations”
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington DC)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Hong Kong)
The Electronic Intellectual Property Center of China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) has released a draft “Template for Intellectual Property Policies in Industry Standardization Organizations” (the Draft Template), seeking public comments by January 30. The Draft Template (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decides on the reasonableness of licensing royalty for standard-essential patents (Ericsson / D-Link)
Constantine Cannon (Washington)
Reasonableness Of Licensing Royalties Is On Trial As Courts And Standard-Setting Organizations Wrestle With Standard-Essential Patents* The ongoing battle over what constitutes a “reasonable” licensing royalty for standard-essential patents has now been joined by the U.S. Court of Appeals for (...)

The Advocate General Wathelet renders his opinion and provides a fresh perspective on FRAND licenses (Huawei / ZTE)
Dentons (Brussels)
The long-awaited Opinion delivered by Advocate General Wathelet on 20 November 2014 in the dispute opposing Huawei and ZTE (Case C-170/13) sheds a new and bright light on the legal landscape for injunctions in SEP-FRAND licensing contexts, provided the Court of Justice follows the Advocate (...)

The EU Commission sends formal charges to companies regarding a cooperation agreement which may have limited availability of a product and technical development (Honeywell / DuPont)
Ashurst (Milan)
Commission sends formal charges to Honeywell and DuPont regarding cooperation on car air conditioning refrigerant* On 21 October 2014 the European Commission issued formal charges to Honeywell and DuPont, based on allegations that the cooperation agreement they entered into in 2010 on the (...)

The US FTC brings a lawsuit in the pharmaceutical sector for monopolization based on patent litigation (AndroGel II)
Covington & Burling (Washington)
,
Covington & Burling (Washington)
,
Covington & Burling (Washington)
The Federal Trade Commission has brought its first suit alleging anticompetitive conduct in connection with the prosecution and settlement of pharmaceutical patent litigation since the Supreme Court’s June 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis. Although two commissioners dissented from the decision to (...)

The EU Court of Justice provides further clarity on when an agreement has the object of restricting competition (Groupement des Cartes Bancaires)
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
Restrictions by object: duck and elephant hunting with the Court of Justice* Inductive reasoning is sometimes explained by using either the ‘duck test’ (“if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck”) or the ‘elephant test’ (“it is difficult to (...)

The EU Court of Justice invites to rethink the approach to pay-for-delay settlements in its case law (Groupement des Cartes Bancaires)
University of East Anglia (Norwich)
European Pharmaceutical Antitrust after Groupment des Cartes Bancaires – Time to Rethink the Approach to Pay For Delay Settlements?* Over the last year the European Commission has stepped up its enforcement efforts against pay for delay settlements. In June 2013 they imposed a fine for the (...)

The US FTC files a complaint against five pharmaceutical companies for pay-for-delay settlements (AbbVie)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (New York)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington DC)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (New York)
On September 8, 2014, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a federal antitrust complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against defendants AbbVie, Abbott Laboratories, Unimed Pharmaceuticals, Besins Healthcare and Teva Pharmaceuticals alleging (...)

The US FTC files a complaint before the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania asserting that reverse payments do not have to be cash or money in order to violate antitrust laws (AbbVie)
Constantine Cannon (New York)
Regulators Prescribing Higher Dose Of Pharmaceutical Antitrust Enforcement* Antitrust enforcers returned to their offices after Labor Day, refreshed and ready to tackle what they view to be anticompetitive practices by pharmaceutical companies to delay entry of lower-priced generic drugs. In (...)

The US District Court for the District of Rhode Island issues concerning ruling on drug patent settlements (Loestrin)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On September 4, 2014, Judge William Smith of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island issued a concerning ruling on drug patent settlements. In In re Loestrin 24 FE Antitrust Litigation, 2014 WL 4368924 (D.R.I., Sept. 4, 2014), Judge Smith misapplied the Supreme Court’s landmark (...)

The Indian Competition Commission pertains for the first time to the concept of ‘aftermarkets’ and discusses the interface between IPRs and competition law (Honda / Volkswagen / Fiat)
Indian Competition Commission (New Delhi)
CCI Order on Car Manufacturers for Anti-Competitive Conduct* Facts: Information was filed under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (“Act”) initially against 3 car manufacturers alleging anti-competitive practices on part of the opposite parties (“OPs”). OP1 to OP3 were involved in the (...)

The Competition Commission of India fines 14 automobile manufacturers for implementing anticompetitive and unilateral practices on the automobile spare parts and repair market (Shamsher Kataria / Honda Siel)
Jindal Global University (Sonipat)
In the month of August, China fined 12 Japanese auto parts makers a total of over US$200 million for price fixing, the maximum amount imposed for violating the anti-monopoly law thus far. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) stated that the companies were found to have (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California finds that an athletics association’s rules restricting payments to student-athletes violate antitrust laws (O’Bannon / NCAA)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On August 8, 2014, in O’Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found that the NCAA violated the antitrust laws by enacting rules that prevented student-athletes from being paid for the use (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California holds that NCAA restrictions on college players exploiting and receiving licensing revenue from the use of their names, images and likenesses violate antitrust law (O’Bannon / NCAA)
Constantine Cannon (New York)
,
Constantine Cannon (New York)
NCAA’s Loss In O’Bannon Trial May Be Only A Partial Victory For Competition* Although competition scored a win on Friday in the student athletes’ antitrust suit led by former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon against the NCAA, it wasn’t a complete blowout. Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. (...)

The EU Court of Justice answers a request for a preliminary ruling about use of trademarks to prevent the importation of spare parts (Honda)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 17 July 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) answered a request for a preliminary ruling from a Greek Court (Monomeles Protodikeio Athinon) inquiring as to whether the use by Honda Giken Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha (“Honda”) of its trademarks to prevent the importation of Honda (...)

The EU Commission imposes a fine of € 427.7 million on a French pharma manufacturer and five generic companies for pay-for-delay settlements impeding price competition on the market for blood pressure medicines (Servier)
University of East Anglia (Norwich)
The EU Commission Decision against Servier – a New Dimension to European Pharmaceutical Antitrust?* On 9 July 2014 the European Commission announced its decision to impose a fine of €427.7 million on French drug maker Servier and five generic companies in relation to so-called ‘pay for delay’ (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismisses allegations of hub-and-spoke conspiracy against 5 pharmaceutical companies in the market for narcolepsy drugs (Apotex / Cephalon)
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
On Monday, June 23, 2014, a Federal Judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment for five pharmaceutical companies on horizontal conspiracy claims brought by Apotex Inc. and direct purchaser and end payor plaintiffs regarding the popular narcolepsy drug Provigil. (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California deals with anti-competitive restrictions preventing payments to basketball players for use of their name, image, and likeness (O’Bannon / NCAA)
Womble Bond Dickinson (Charlotte)
Three Questions for the Third Week of the O’Bannon v. NCAA Trial* As the O’Bannon v. NCAA trial enters its third week, commentators are already predicting the fall of the “college sports cartel.” In the case, a group of about 20 current and former college men’s basketball and football players, led (...)

The Australian Competition and Consumer Authority issues a draft determination proposing to allow royalty managers for plant breeders to collectively negotiate with the grain buyers (Seedvise)
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (Canberra)
ACCC proposes to authorise plant breeders’ collective bargaining arrangements* The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has issued a draft determination proposing to allow royalty managers for plant breeders to collectively negotiate with the grain buyers they engage to collect (...)

The US FTC appeals the US District Court for the District of New Jersey decision that a “no authorized generic” agreement cannot be an antitrust violation (King Drug / SmithKlineBeecham)
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
On May 2, 2014, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit requesting that the court reverse the district court’s decision in Lamictal Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, finding that a “no authorized generic” agreement between (...)

The US FTC files an amicus brief before the Court of Appeals explaining that commitment not to compete raises the same antitrust concerns as the reverse-payment patent settlements (King Drug / SmithKlineBeecham)
DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach (Vienna)
U.S. FTC files an amicus brief in the Court of Appeal urging to reverse the District Court finding in the Lamictal Direct Purchase Antitrust Litigation* On 28 April, 2014 the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed an amicus brief in the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in the (...)

The EU Commission announces the adoption of a revised technology transfer block exemption regulation and new accompanying guidelines
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
This article has been nominated for the 2015 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Introduction The European Commission has recently announced its adoption of a revised Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation and new accompanying (...)

The EU Commission issues new rules for assessing technology licensing agreements under Article 101 TFEU
Jones Day (Brussels)
,
Jones Day (Brussels)
,
Jones Day (Brussels)
European Union Adopts New Rules for Technology Licensing Agreements* The European Union has a new regime for assessing technology licensing agreements under EU competition law. The new rules include a new technology transfer block exemption regulation (“TTBER”), which exempts certain bilateral (...)

The EU Commission adopts revised competition regime for technology transfer agreements
European Commission (Brussels)
European Commission adopts revised Competition Regime for Technology Transfer Agreements* The European Commission (Commission) adopted in March 2014 new competition rules for assessing technology transfer agreements, through which a licensor permits a licensee to exploit patents, know- how (...)

The Italian Competition Authority finds that two companies entered in an anti-competitive agreement in the ophthalmic drugs market (Roche / Novartis)
Ashurst (Milan)
Italian Competition Authority imposes hefty fines on Roche and Novartis* On 27 February 2014, the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) issued a decision (in Italian only) finding that Roche and Novartis entered into an anticompetitive agreement in the market for ophthalmic drugs used to treat (...)

The Danish Competition Authority accepts new commitments in relation to a joint sales agreement between football clubs in the top Danish league (Superliga)
DLA Piper (Copenhagen)
,
TDC Group (Copenhague)
On 26 February 2014 the Danish Competition Council (“DCC”) accepted revised commitments offered by the Association of Danish League Clubs (“ADLC”) regarding the joint sale of media rights to the premier Danish football leagues. The new commitments allow for a longer rights period (6 years), but (...)

The EU Commission initiates a formal investigation into potentially anti-competitive restrictions in pay-TV licensing arrangements
Blackstone Chambers (London)
This article has been nominated for the 2014 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Murphy, round 2: does exclusive territorial licensing of pay-TV breach EU competition law?* According to a report in the Financial Times on 24 November 2013, the (...)

The EU Commission imposes fines totaling €16 million on pharmaceutical companies for delaying market entry of generic pain-killer (Johnson & Johnson / Novartis)
European Commission (Brussels)
European Commission imposes Fines of € 16 000 000 on Johnson & Johnson and Novartis for delaying Market Entry of generic Pain-Killer Fentanyl* On 10 December 2013, the European Commission imposed fines of € 10 798 000 on the US pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and € 5 (...)

The EU Commission publishes its fourth report on the monitoring of patent settlements in Europe
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
This article has been nominated for the 2014 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Executive Summary On 9 December 2013, DG Comp published its fourth report on the monitoring in Europe of patent settlements. Like its predecessors, the report (...)

The Canadian Competition Bureau announces new regulatory intervention efforts into the regulation of pharmacists in Alberta
Steve Szentesi Law Corporation (Vancouver)
Competition Bureau Announces First New Advocacy Initiative: Self-regulated Professions (Pharmacist Inducements in Alberta): Patient Care v. Competitive Markets* On September 10th, the Canadian Competition Bureau announced a public consultation for suggestions where it should intervene in (...)

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denies the motions to dismiss the plaintiff’s amended complaint against the "anti-troll" group organizing a boycott of android related patents (Cascades Computer Innovation / RPX)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (San Francisco)
“Anti-Patent Troll” Fails to Secure Dismissal of Amended Antitrust Complaint* Back in January, I covered the case of Cascades Computer Innovation LLC v. RPX Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10526 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2013), where Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers dismissed – with leave to amend – Cascades’ (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority fines media company and football clubs for breaching a resolution on the acquisition of broadcasting rights for football competitions (Mediapro / Real Madrid / FC Barcelona / Sevilla / Racing de Santander)
European Commission (Brussels)
Spain: The Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia fines Mediapro and four Football Clubs € 15 000 000* On 2 December 2013, the Council of the National Commission for Markets and Competition (Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia or CNMC) imposed fines amounting to € 15 (...)

The EU Commission is set to open an investigation that could outlaw exclusive territorial models of pay-TV licensing
Blackstone Chambers (London)
This article has been nominated for the 2014 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Murphy, round 2: does exclusive territorial licensing of pay-TV breach EU competition law?* According to a report in the Financial Times on 24 November 2013, the (...)

The US FTC submits brief amicus curiae in a pay-for-delay case in which it supports the absence of a cash payment is not determinative in the pharmaceutical sector (In Re Effexor XR)
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) battle against “reverse-payment” settlements continues. In an amicus brief recently submitted in the case of In re Effexor XR Antitrust Litigation, the FTC advanced a broad interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis that looks beyond the (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California rejects the defendants’ motion to dismiss challenging antitrust claims arising out of an exclusive license deal (Patrick Dang / San Francisco Forty Niners)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (San Francisco)
Single-Brand Market Claims Are Not Dead* Modern antitrust law’s focus on inter-brand competition has made it much more difficult to plead and prove single-brand market claims. The law’s concern with inter-brand competition is so strong that some observers have all but written off such claims as (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority imposes fines on three entities for setting up a traceability system that have led to sales restrictions (Nadorcott Protection / Carpa Dorada / Club de Variedades Vegetales Protegidas)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 4 July 2013, the CNC fined three entities for setting up a traceability system that led to restrictions of sales of the Nadorcott tangerine. The fined entities were the holder of the Community plant variety rights for the Nadorcott tangerine (Nadorcott Protection, S.A.R.L.); an (...)

The EU Commission fines pharmaceutical companies for delaying market entry of generic medicines (Lundbeck)
Ashurst (Milan)
,
RSM US (New York)
European Commission fines Lundbeck and other pharmaceutical companies for delaying market entry of generic medicines* On 19 June 2013 the European Commission issued a press release stating that it had imposed fines in the amount of € 93,8 million on Lundbeck (a Danish pharmaceutical company) (...)

The EU Commission fines pharmaceutical companies for delaying market entry of generic medicines through pay-for-delay agreements (Lundbeck)
European Commission (Brussels)
European Commission: Lundbeck and other Pharmaceutical Companies fined for delaying Market Entry of Generic Medicines through pay-for-delay Agreements* On 19 June 2013, the European Commission (the Commission) imposed a fine on the Danish pharmaceutical company Lundbeck and a number of (...)

The EU Commission imposes fines totaling up to €145 million on a Danish pharmaceutical group over pay-for-delay agreements (Lundbeck)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 19 June 2013, the European Commission announced that it had imposed a fine of € 93.8 million on Danish pharmaceutical group Lundbeck and fines totalling € 52.2 million on several generic medicines producers over their conclusion of so-called “pay-for-delay” agreements intended to hinder the (...)

The US Supreme Court opens reverse payment patent settlement agreements to antitrust challenge (Actavis)
Wolters Kluwer (Riverwoods)
A “reverse payment” settlement agreement is not entitled to “near-automatic antitrust immunity” simply because its anticompetitive effects fall within the scope of the exclusionary potential of the patent, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled earlier this week in a five-to-three decision. Although such (...)

The US Supreme Court holds that reverse-payment in patent settlements should be reviewed under the antitrust rule of reason (Actavis)
Gibson Dunn (Washington)
,
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (San Francisco)
,
O’Melveny & Myers (Washington DC)
But Decision Raises as Many Questions as it Answers The Supreme Court yesterday held that it may be unlawful under the antitrust laws for a brand-name drug manufacturer to resolve patent litigation against an allegedly infringing generic drug maker by paying the generic to forestall market (...)

The US Supreme Court issues first ruling on antitrust legality of reverse-payment drug patent settlements (Actavis)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On June 17, 2013, in FTC v. Actavis, the U.S. Supreme Court for the first time examined the antitrust legality of agreements by which brand-name drug companies pay generics to delay entering the market. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion for five Justices, concluding that these (...)

The US Supreme Court rules that reverse patent settlements may violate antitrust law (Actavis)
Womble Bond Dickinson (Washington)
FTC v. Actavis, Inc.: Supreme Court Rules That Reverse Patent Settlements May Violate Antitrust Laws* On June 17, 2013, in FTC v. Actavis, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that "reverse patent settlements" may violate the Sherman Act even though the anticompetitive effects of the settlement fall (...)

The US Supreme Court holds that “reverse payment” patent settlements between brand-name drug manufacturers and would-be generic competitors should be reviewed under the antitrust rule of reason (Actavis)
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Brussels)
,
Latham & Watkins (San Francisco)
,
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Washington)
On Monday, June 17, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc., bringing some clarity to the antitrust treatment of so-called reverse payment patent settlements between brand-name drug manufacturers and would-be generic competitors, but leaving many open questions as (...)

The US Supreme Court holds that patent protection does not confer immunity from an antitrust attack (Actavis)
Ashurst (Milan)
,
RSM US (New York)
U.S. Supreme Court reverses Eleventh Circuit opinion in FTC v. Actavis, Inc* On 17 June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court (“the Court”) reversed a decision by the Court of Appeals (Eleventh Circuit). The Court of Appeals had upheld a dismissal of a complaint made by the Federal Trade Commission (...)

The US Supreme Court rules that the “pay for delay” settlements in the pharmaceutical sector are to be analyzed under the rule of reason (Actavis)
DG CNECT (Brussels)
Facts In 1999, Solvay Pharmaceuticals filed a New Drug Application (NDA) for a topical testosterone hormone drug, called Androgel. In 2003, Solvay obtained patent protection for it. Subsequently, the generic companies Actavis (before Watson Pharmaceuticals) and Paddock Laboratories filed an (...)

The US Supreme Court rules that a payment by a patentee to a generic manufacturer may constitute an infringement of antitrust law (Actavis)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (San Francisco)
Why FTC v. Actavis Won’t Shift the Border Between IP and Antitrust Law* The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., No. 12-416, U.S (2013), has generated a lot of commentary recently. Some articles have suggested that the decision may expose certain (...)

The US Supreme Court establishes a rule that blurs the lines between antitrust and patent law (Actavis)
Sheppard Mullin (Chicago)
,
Sterlington
FTC v. Actavis: What Does It Mean for Reverse-Payment Settlements?* On June 17, 2013, the United States Supreme Court announced a rule that blurs the lines between antitrust and patent law in the context of Hatch-Waxman litigation. In FTC v. Actavis, 570 U.S. 756 (2013), the Federal Trade (...)

The UK OFT issues statement of objections to four pharma companies alleging they acted to delay effective competition in the national supply of antidepressant medicine (GSK / GUK / Alpharma / IVAX)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
To fight or not to fight: pharmaceutical patent settlements* On 19 April 2013, the OFT announced that it had issued a Statement of Objections following its investigation into patent litigation settlement agreements (PLSAs) in the pharmaceutical sector. The underlying factual complaint related (...)

The UK OFT issues statement of objections to certain pharmaceutical companies alleging they acted to delay effective competition in the UK supply of medicine (GSK / GUK / Alpharma / IVAX)
European Commission (Brussels)
United Kingdom: The OFT issues Statement of Objections in Case involving Pharmaceutical Companies* On 19 April 2013, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) issued a Statement of Objections to certain pharmaceutical companies alleging they acted to delay effective competition in the UK supply of (...)

The UK OFT issues a statement of objections to four pharmaceutical manufacturers for anticompetitive agreements over the supply of paroxetine (GSK / GUK / Alpharma / IVAX)
Ashurst (Milan)
UK OFT investigates GSK and generics manufacturers over pay for delay deals* On 19 April 2013 the UK Office of Fair Trading (“OFT”) issued a Statement of Objections to GlaxoSmithKline (“GSK”) and three generics manufacturers (Alpharma Limited, Generics UK Limited and Norton Healthcare Limited) (...)

The EU General Court partially annuls a Commission decision on anti-competitive conduct among copyright collecting societies (CISAC)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 12 April 2013, the EU General Court (GC) handed down its judgments in the appeals brought by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) and 21 of its member collecting society associations against an earlier decision of the European Commission finding (...)

The Singapore Competition Authority publishes its market study on the competition assessment on the industrial property market
BHP Billiton (Singapore)
On 2 April 2013, the Competition Commission of Singapore (the “CCS”) published a market study entitled “Competition Assessment on the Industrial Property Market in Singapore” (the “Market Study”). The Market Study contains the CCS’ competition assessment of the industrial property market in Singapore (...)

The U.S. FTC files amicus curiae brief supporting generics’ claim in patent dispute (Actelion Pharms / Apotex)
DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach (Vienna)
U.S. FTC files amicus curiae brief supporting generics’ claim in patent dispute* On 11 March 2013 the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed an amicus curiae brief in the case Actelion Pharms Ltd. V. Apotex Inc. which is being heard in the U.S. District Court for New Jersey supporting the (...)

The EU Commission proposes a draft for a revised regulation on the application of art. 101(3) TFEU on agreements for technology transfer
University of East Anglia (Norwich)
Competition Law as a complement to Intellectual Property Law?* The European Commission is currently consulting on proposed revisions to the Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation (TTBER) and associated Guidelines. These documents provide legal rules and guidelines in relation to (...)

The Italian Competition Authority opens investigation against pharmaceutical companies over suspected cartel activity in the ophthalmologic medicines market (Roche / Novartis)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 14 February 2013, the Italian Competition Authority (the “Authority”) announced that it had opened an investigation against Genentech Inc., Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Novartis AG, Novartis Farma S.p.A. and Roche S.p.A., over suspicions that these may have been operating an illegal cartel in (...)

The Italian Competition Authority launches an investigation against pharmaceutical companies suspected of restricting drug sales (Roche / Novartis)
Studio Legale Scoccini (Rome)
On February 6, 2013, the Italian Competition Authority ("ICA") launched a cartel investigation against Hoffmann-La Roche ("Roche"), Novartis, their respective Italian subsidiaries, and Genentec, a US company controlled by Roche and in which Novartis holds a 33% shareholding. The companies (...)

The Italian Competition Authority opens proceedings against pharmaceutical companies in relation to an alleged anticompetitive agreement for restricting drug sales (Roche / Novartis)
Ashurst (Milan)
Roche and Novartis investigated for an alleged cartel in Italy* On 6 February 2013 the Italian Competition Authority opened proceedings against the Roche Group and the Novartis Group in relation to an alleged anticompetitive agreement for excluding the ophthalmic use of Roche’s Avastin in order (...)

The EU Commission sends statements of objections to two pharmaceutical companies over a possible delayed entry of a generic pain-killer (Johnson & Johnson / Novartis)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 31 January 2013, the European Commission announced that it had sent a Statement of Objections (“SO”) to pharmaceutical companies Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) and Novartis over suspicions that an agreement between their Dutch subsidiaries in relation to Fentanyl (a strong pain killer (...)

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismisses with leave to amend antitrust claims against high-tech producers employing the android operating system (Cascades Computer Innovation / RPX)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (San Francisco)
Can An “Anti-Patent Troll” Be a Monopsonist or a Section 1 Conspirator?* A recent interesting case suggests that “anti-patent trolls” may in theory face antitrust liability. In Cascades Computer Innovation LLC v. RPX Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10526 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2013), Judge Yvonne (...)

The US FTC releases a summary of its new report on pharma patent litigation finding an increase in reverse payment settlements based on an expanded definition of payments
Jones Day (Washington DC)
,
Jones Day (Washington DC)
,
Jones Day (Chicago)
With the Supreme Court set to address the validity of "reverse payment" settlements of pharmaceutical patent litigation, the FTC released a summary of its new report, announcing that in 2012 drug companies entered "a record number" of such settlements. However, the underlying data and analysis (...)

The US FTC imposes limits on enforcing FRAND licensing of standards-essential patents through the threat of seeking of injunctions (Google / Motorola)
International Center for Law & Economics (Portland)
,
International Center for Law & Economics (Portland)
Introduction In January of 2013, the Federal Trade Commission and Google (acting through its subsidiary, Motorola Mobility) signed a Consent Order ending the agency’s investigation into a number of practices. Much of the Order is aimed at imposing antitrust-based limits on the allowable process (...)

The EU Commission renders legally binding commitments regarding competition concerns on markets for aluminium smelting equipment (Rio Tinto Alcan)
Ashurst (Milan)
European Commission renders legally binding commitments on Rio Tinto Alcan* On 20 December 2012, the Commission issued a press release stating that it has made legally binding the commitments offered by Rio Tinto Alcan (“Alcan”) to address the Commission’s concerns that Alcan might have infringed (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority opens formal proceedings in the pharmaceutical industry (Pfizer)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 19 December 2012, the Spanish Competition Authority (“CNC”) announced that it had opened formal proceedings against Pfizer over concerns that the company may have engaged in anti-competitive practices in the market for medicines based on latanopost for the treatment of glaucoma, contrary (...)

The US Supreme Court grants certiorari to consider the legality of reverse payment settlements (Actavis)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. Supreme Court grants certiorari to consider the legality of reverse payment settlements* On 7 December 2012 the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition to consider whether reverse payment settlement agreements are per se lawful or presumptively anti-competitive. In the case (U.S. Federal (...)

A US Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit provides additional guidance regarding the limits on standing to bring a Walker Process antitrust claim against a patent owner (Ritz Camera & Image / SanDisk)
Gill Jennings & Every (London)
The Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit recently provided additional guidance regarding the limits on standing to bring a Walker Process antitrust claim against a patent owner and arguably expanded the class of parties eligible to bring such a claim. Under the Supreme Court’s holding in (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania finds anti-competitive conduct of major players in the international telecommunications market within the context of a standard-setting organization (TruePosition / Ericsson)
Davis Wright Tremaine (Washington DC)
Antitrust & Associations: “Standard Setting Can Be Risky Business”* Virtually every industry, from telecommunications to agriculture, has benefited from standard-setting organizations (SSOs), whose collaborative work can advance technology, promote health and safety, and enhance quality and (...)

The French Competition Authority calls for progressive lifting of restrictions on distribution of visible spare parts
European Commission (Brussels)
France: The Autorité de la Concurrence calls for progressive Lifting of Restrictions on Distribution of visible Spare Parts* Following the launch of its sector inquiry into the automotive aftermarkets in 2011 and an open and transparent public consultation on its provisional findings, the (...)

The EU Commission sends statements of objections to more than a dozen companies concerning investigations in the pharmaceutical sector (Citalopram / Perindopril)
Ashurst (Milan)
European Commission issues Statements of Objections against several pharmaceutical companies* On 25 and 30 July 2012, in relation to the Citalopram case and the Perindopril case respectively, the European Commission sent statements of objections (“SOs”) to more than a dozen companies in (...)

The EU Commission sends a statement of objections to pharmaceutical companies over pay-for-delay agreements (Lundbeck)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 July 2012, the European Commission announced that it had sent a formal Statement of Objections (“SO”) to Danish pharmaceutical company Lundbeck over its conclusion of so-called “pay-for-delay” agreements with four generic producers of citalopram, a antidepressant medicine. In its SO, (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit applies the rule of reason and rejects the "scope of the patent" test when pharma patent settlement violates the antitrust laws (Schering-Plough)
Hyman, Phelps & McNamara (Washington DC)
In our post, “Hot Ticket Item – Patent Settlement Agreement Challenges,” we provided a round-up of the latest and greatest from ongoing litigation concerning patent settlement agreements (or “pay-for-delay” agreements if you prefer that term – we don’t). It’s only been about three weeks since that (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejects the "scope of the patent" test in an antitrust challenge to patent settlements (Schering-Plough)
Wolters Kluwer (Riverwoods)
Third Circuit Rejects Scope-of-Patent Test in Antitrust Challenge to K-Dur Patent Settlement* Reverse payments settlements between patent holders and would-be generic competitors in the pharmaceutical industry should be reviewed under a “quick look” rule of reason analysis based on the economic (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejects the “scope of the patent” test in favor of a quick look rule of reason analysis when reviewing reverse payment settlements between patent holders and potential generic competitors in the pharmaceutical industry (Schering-Plough)
Vinson & Elkins (Dallas)
Citing the dire consequences for companies seeking to comply with antitrust law in the wake of a direct circuit split, major pharmaceutical makers are asking the Supreme Court to review a Third Circuit decision that declared settlement payments by brand-name pharmaceutical companies to (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit adopts the rule of reason analysis in evaluating the legality of reverse payment settlements by rejecting the "scope of patent" test and creating a Circuit split on this issue (Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company / Schering / Upsher-Smith)
Gill Jennings & Every (London)
On 16 July 2012, the US Third Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the scope of the patent test used by the New Jersey District Court in concluding that the patent settlement agreements (“Agreements”), providing for payments from Schering-Plough Corporation (“Schering”) (subsequently acquired by Merck (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holds that reverse payment settlements between brand name and generic pharmaceutical manufacturers may be unlawful under the rule of reason (Schering-Plough)
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Washington)
,
Hooper Hathaway (Michigan)
On July 16, 2012, in an opinion authored by Judge Sloviter, the Third Circuit issued its decision in the K-Dur “reverse payments” case, holding that although such settlements are not illegal per se, they are presumptively unlawful under the rule of reason. In so doing it rejected the approach (...)

The UK Supreme Court rejects respondent’s argument according to which enforcement of the plaintiff’s trade marks could lead to infringements of EU law (Oracle America / M-Tech Data)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
Supreme Court puts brake on “Euro defences”* The UK Supreme Court has given trade mark proprietors reason to celebrate, in a judgment which is likely to have important consequences for the success of “Euro defences” more broadly. See: Oracle America Inc (formerly Sun Microsystems Inc) v M-Tech (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit rejects the FTC’s approach to a pay-for-delay settlement between a brand name and generic drug companies as an unlawful agreement not to compete (Solvay / Watson / Paddock)
Wolters Kluwer (Riverwoods)
Eleventh Circuit Rejects FTC’s Approach to Pay-for-Delay Settlements as “Turducken Task”* The U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta rejected on April 25, 2012 the Federal Trade Commission’s challenge to a patent litigation settlement between brand name and generic drug companies as an unlawful (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit rejects the FTC’s latest pay-for-delay challenge (Solvay / Watson / Paddock)
Mayer Brown (Washington)
,
US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Washington)
On April 25, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) complaint against four pharmaceutical companies: Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Watson Pharmaceuticals, Par Pharmaceuticals, and Paddock Laboratories. The (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reaffirms that the "scope of the patent" test is the proper standard for antitrust review of reverse payment settlements among pharmaceutical companies (Solvay / Watson / Paddock)
United First Partners (New York)
Introduction In FTC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Watson”), the Eleventh Circuit reaffirmed its long line of precedents and held that, absent sham litigation or fraud in obtaining the patent, the “scope of the patent” test should be used to evaluate antitrust challenges to the reverse payment (...)

The Tirana Court of Appeals upholds the District Court’s judgment quashing the NCA decision concerning a concerted practice case in the markets for wheat import and production of flour (Atlas / Bloja)
University of Tirana
On April 2012 the Court of Appeals of Tirana handed down a judgment confirming a decision of the District Court of Tirana on quashing a decision of the Albanian Competition Authority (ACA). This decision imposed a fine on two major companies operating in the market of import of wheat and the (...)

The Romanian Competition Authority finalises its report in an inquiry into the automotive spare parts market
Kinstellar (Bucarest)
,
OMV Petrom (Bucharest)
In February 2009, a sector inquiry was initiated by the Romanian Competition Council (the “Competition Council”) aiming at a better understanding of the auto vehicle spare parts market. On 18 April 2012, the Competition Council published its findings in a detailed report (the “Report”). The (...)

The Italian Competition Authority fines a pharmaceutical undertaking for abusing its dominant position in the market for the treatment of visual glaucoma products (Pfizer)
Ashurst (Milan)
Italian Competition Authority fines Pfizer for abuse of dominance relating to visual glaucoma drugs* On 11 January 2012 the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) issued a decision fining Pfizer Euro 10.6 million for abusing its dominant position in the market for products for that treat visual (...)

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismisses claims of anti-competitive exclusion of positioning technology from standards (Trueposition / Ericsson)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. District Court dismisses claims of anti-competitive exclusion of positioning technology from standards* On 6 January 2012 the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted motions to dismiss claims that manufacturers of mobile telecommunications products conspired (...)

The EU Commission opens proceedings against two manufacturers of refrigerants used in car air conditioning (Honeywell / du Pont)
Ashurst (Milan)
European Commission investigates DuPont and Honeywell practices in relation to new refrigerant* On 16 December 2011 the European Commission opened proceedings to investigate alleged anti-competitive practices relating to the development of a new generation refrigerant for air conditioning (...)

The Romanian Competition Authority fines two suppliers of prescription-only medicines and their distributors for parallel export restrictions (Baxter / Belupo)
Peli Filip (Bucharest)
,
Peli Filip (Bucharest)
On 28 October 2011, the Romanian Competition Council (the “Council”) published Decisions n° 51 and 52/28.10.2011 sanctioning two suppliers of prescription-only medicines - Belupo Iijekovi & kozmetica d.d. Croatia (“Belupo”) and Baxter AG Switzerland (“Baxter”) - and their distributors on the (...)

Intellectual Property & Antitrust: A synthesis of EU and national case law
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
The interaction between competition rules and intellectual property ("IP") rights has long been among the most interesting, controversial and widely discussed issues in competition law. At a first glance, the objectives of IP law and competition rules might seem to be at odds with each other. (...)

The EU Court of Justice renders its judgment on licensing of satellite broadcasting holding that national law blocking the importation of foreign decoders is contrary to the freedom to provide services (Football Association Premier League)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
The Court of Justice Speaks On Licensing Of Satellite Broadcasting* On October 4, the European Court of Justice rendered its judgment in Premier League v QC Leisure. The Court concludes that blocking the importation of Greek pay-TV decoders into the UK restricts the freedom to provide services (...)

The EU Court of Justice validates exclusive rights for broadcasting of sports events provided they do not grant absolute territorial exclusivity (Football Association Premier League)
Vogel & Vogel (Paris)
The Football Association Premier League (FAPL), holder of the television broadcasting rights for the Premier League, the leading professional football league competition for football clubs in England, grants exclusive licences in respect of those broadcasting rights to one TV channel per (...)

The Washington State passes revised unfair competition law increasing exposure for misappropriated IP
White & Case (Washington)
,
White & Case (Washington)
,
White & Case (Washington)
This article has been nominated for the 2013 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. US State Unfair Competition Laws Create Increased Exposure for Misappropriated IP* For many years, information technology companies in the United States have (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority fines associations in press clippings sector (Asociación de Editores de Diarios Españoles / Asociación Española de Prensa Gratuita / Asociación Federativa de Empresas de Clipping)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
The Spanish Competition Authority has recently imposed fines totalling € 335,000 on the Association of Spanish Newspaper Editors (Asociación de Editores de Diarios Españoles- AEDE), the Spanish Free Press Association (Asociación Española de Prensa Gratuita- AEPG) and the Federative Association of (...)

The EU Commission opens an investigation against two pharmaceutical companies on account of a patent settlement agreement (Cephalon / Teva)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 28 April 2011, the European Commission opened of its own motion formal competition proceedings against Cephalon, Inc. (“Cephalon”) and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. (“Teva”) on account of a patent settlement agreement between the parties. Under the agreement, Teva undertook not to sell (...)

The EU Court of Justice Advocate General Kokott considers that territorial exclusivity agreements relating to transmission of live football matches are contrary to EU law (Football Association Premier League)
Wiggin (London)
I. Background The Football Association Premier League (“FAPL”) is the governing body of English Premier League football. Every year FAPL organises a competition in which 20 member clubs play against each other. FAPL is authorised by its members to license broadcasters to provide audiovisual (...)

The Advocate General Kokott renders her opinion holding that the principle of exhaustion applies to the transmission of live football matches in the same way as to physical products (Football Association Premier League)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
UK Pubs And Greek Decoders – The Implications Of The Premier League Case For The Dissemination Of Digital Content* The European Court of Justice is expected to render its judgment in Premier League v QC Leisure in the next few months. At the heart of the case, lies the question whether (...)

The German Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf specifies the requirements for granting a compulsory license under antitrust law (Zwangslizenzeinwand)
Dentons (Berlin)
In its decision of 20 January 2011, the Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf (“OLG Düsseldorf“) specified the requirements for granting a compulsory license under antitrust law, resulting from Article 102 TFEU. The court thereby clarified the requirement of indispensability and the definition of a new (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that a Japanese company may block unauthorised imports into the EU (Canon)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 28 October 2010, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) ruled that Canon Kabushiki Kaisha (“Canon”), a Japanese manufacturer of copying machines, cameras, optical and other products, could prevent a Bulgarian trader from importing ink cartridges from Hong Kong into the EU if it were (...)

The EU Commission declares that it will not open formal proceedings in the mobile phone sector (Apple iPhone)
Ashurst (Milan)
European Commission closes preliminary investigations into Apple’s iPhone policies* On 25 September 2010, the European Commission declared that it would not open formal proceedings against Apple, following Apple’s iPhone change of policies on restrictions on the development of applications (or (...)

The U.S. House Judiciary Committee holds a hearing on competition in the evolving digital marketplace
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. hearing on competition in the digital marketplace* On 16 September 2010 the Subcommittee on the Courts and Competition Policy of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Competition in the Evolving Digital Marketplace. A prepared statement of the U.S. Federal Trade (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarifies requirements for the patent misuses (Princo)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. Federal Circuit (en banc) finds no patent misuse in Princo* On 30 August 2010 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (en banc, 8-2) found – in contrast to an earlier ruling by a panel of the Court – that an alleged agreement between Philips Corp. and Sony Corp. to suppress a (...)

The UK Court of Appeal grants permission to appeal and proceed to a full trial on defence against trademark infringement allegations (Oracle / M-Tech)
Ashurst (Milan)
English Court of Appeal allows M-Tech’s appeal against Oracle* On 28 August 2010, the English Court of Appeal issued a judgment setting aside an order for summary judgment by the High Court of Justice, thus granting M-Tech permission to appeal and proceed to a full trial to defend itself (...)

The Finnish Competition Authority issues a study on EU Competition rules concerning technology agreements
European Commission (Brussels)
Finland: Study on EU Competition Rules concerning Technology Agreements* On 12 August 2010, the Ministry of Employment and the Economy published a report on competition rules applicable to technology agreements prepared by the Finnish Competition Authority. This report examines how EU (...)

The Italian Competition Authority accepts commitments submitted by the leading auction company following an investigation into unfair practices (Sotheby’s)
Codacons (Rome)
The Italian branch of Sotheby’s, Sotheby’s S.r.l. (hereninafter SHT), sells and buys antiques, arts and collection items during public auctions. The Italian Antitrust Authority (hereinafter ICA), started investigation in March 2010, because was reported that SHT provided incomplete and deceiving (...)

The U.S. FTC asks the 11th Circuit to overturn a lower court’s decision to allow a reverse payment settlement between branded and generic pharmaceutical manufacturers (Watson Pharmaceuticals)
Vinson & Elkins (Washington)
,
Reese Gordon Marketos (Dallas)
A growing consensus among federal courts that so-called “reverse-payment” settlements rarely violate antitrust law has not tempered antitrust enforcement authorities’ opposition to such deals. In the pharmaceutical industry, brand-name drug manufacturers may file patent infringement lawsuits (...)

The Svea Court of Appeal in Stockholm regards an association for copyright holders as undertaking and views ancillary agreements as giving effect to an anti-competitive agreement (ALIS / Mediearkivet)
Baker McKenzie (Stockholm)
ALIS (The Administration of Literary Rights) is a non-profit organisation that was formed by four associations for educational writers, authors, journalists and actors. To ALIS were also a number of independent copyright holders associated by agreement. ALIS role is to protect the member’s (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules against imported perfume ’tester’ resale (Coty Prestige Lancaster Group)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 3 June 2010, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) added another judgment to its line of case-law concerning the trademark exhaustion rules. In Case C-127/09, Coty Prestige Lancaster Groupv. Simex Trading, the ECJ ruled that a German trader cannot sell imported perfume “testers” (...)

The Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law Enforcer publishes new draft rules on monopoly agreements
Jones Day (Beijing)
,
Gibson Dunn (Hong Kong)
,
Jones Day (Beijing)
On May 25, 2010, the State Administration of Industry and Commerce ("SAIC") published for public comment three sets of draft rules. These (1) "monopoly agreements," that is, anticompetitive agreements, (2) abuses of dominant market position, and (3) "administrative monopolies," anticompetitive (...)

The US Supreme Court reverses the lower court’s decisions addressing the issue of single entity notion under antitrust law (American Needle / National Football League)
University of Pennsylvania (Old Westbury)
American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League* In American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League, 130 S.Ct. 2201 (2010), the Supreme Court held that the NFL acting through its incorporated subsidiary NFL Properties, Inc. (NFLP) was not a single entity but rather a combination of its 32 (...)

The EU Commission publishes draft rules for the assessment of horizontal cooperation agreements under competition law
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
European Commission publishes draft guidelines on horizontal agreements and R&D block exemption regulation* On 4 May 2010 the European Commission published, for public consultation, draft guidelines on horizontal agreements and two related draft block exemption regulations, including one (...)

The US Court of Appeals holds that reverse payment agreements between a patentee and generic pharma manufacturers that do not exceed the "scope of the patent" are not illegal under the federal antitrust laws (Bayer)
McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff (Chicago)
On April 29th, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the "pay-for-delay" agreement between defendants Bayer AG and several generic drugmakers (including The Rugby Group, Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Barr Laboratories Inc.) were not illegal under U.S. antitrust law and (...)

The French Supreme Court agrees with EU Court of Justice that a trademark owner can oppose the resale of its luxury goods by discount stores (Caud / Chanel)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In its recently published judgment in Caud/Chanel, the French Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation) followed the approach of the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) in Copad/Christian Dior Coutureconcerning the exhaustion of trademark rights in respect of luxury goods. In that judgment, the ECJ held (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia dismisses the FTC’s pay-for-delay antitrust lawsuit ruling that the contested settlements are not an unreasonable restraint of trade (Androgel)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington DC)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington DC)
,
Fordham Competition Law Institute - FCLI (New York)
On February 22, 2010, Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. dismissed the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) antitrust lawsuit alleging that Solvay Pharmaceuticals (Solvay) conspired with generic drug makers Watson Pharmaceuticals (Watson) and Par Pharmaceuticals (Par) to delay generic competition for the (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia grants defendants’ motions to dismiss antitrust claims submitted by the FTC regarding reverse payments settlements and related commercial arrangements (Androgel)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. District Court dismisses AndroGel reverse payment antitrust claims* On 22 February 2010 the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta Division) granted defendants’ motions to dismiss antitrust claims brought by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) among others that (...)

The US DoJ files a statement of interest and raises concerns about cooperation and exclusivity regarding a proposed settlement in an e-books case (Google Books)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. Department of Justice remains concerned over antitrust issues raised by “Google Books” settlement* On 4 February 2010 the U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest regarding the proposed amended settlement agreement in The Authors Guild Inc. et al. v. Google Inc. with the (...)

The EU Commission monitors whether patent settlements concluded between pharmaceutical companies infringe EU antitrust rules
Morgan Lewis (London)
,
Squire Patton Boggs (London)
On 12 January 2010, the European Commission sent an information request to a number of pharmaceutical companies, seeking copies of their patent settlement agreements, to check their compliance with EU antitrust rules (Official Press Release IP/10/12), as a follow up to its pharmaceutical sector (...)

The UK High Court rejects competition defence in a trademark infringement case (Sun Microsystems)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 November 2009, the UK High Court of Justice ruled, inter alia, that a competition law defence raised by M-Tech Data Limited (“M-Tech”) stood no real prospect of success in an application for summary judgment brought by Sun Microsystems (“Sun”), concerning the defendant’s infringement of Sun‘s (...)

The US DoJ files an amicus brief on reverse payment settlements on the market for broad-spectrum antimicrobial medicines (Arkansas Carpenters Health / Bayer / Hoechst / Watson)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. DOJ files amicus brief on reverse payment settlements* On 6 July 2009 the U.S. Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in a reverse payment settlement case on appeal before the 2nd Circuit (In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation). The filing is in response of an (...)

The Polish Competition Authority imposes a financial penalty on a collective copyright management association for practices restricting competition (SAWP)
WKB Wiercinski Kwiecinski Baehr (Poznan)
,
Orange (Warsaw)
Introduction Polish competition authority questions the practices of the Polish Musical Performing Artists’ Association (SAWP - Stowarzyszenie Artystów Wykonawców Utworów Muzycznych i Słowno-Muzycznych). In the decision from June 10, 2009, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that a trademark owner can oppose the resale of his luxury goods by discount stores (Copad / Christian Dior couture)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 23 April 2009, in its judgment in Case C-59/08 Copad SA v Christian Dior couture SA, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) shed further light on the often contentious topic of exhaustion of trade mark rights in respect of luxury goods. Christian Dior Couture SA (“Dior”) had concluded a licence (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses appeal against rejection of complaint with respect to collective management of copyright for musical works in Greece (AEPI)
Court of First Instance of Namur (Namur)
On 23 April 2009, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) dismissed the appeal brought by AEPI against a judgment of the Court of First Instance (“CFI”) upholding the Commission’s decision to reject a complaint lodged by AEPI, a Greek entity in charge of collective management of intellectual property (...)

The EU Commission prepares questionnaires for the reassessment of the competition rules applicable to online commerce
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
It has been reported that the Commission is currently preparing questionnaires in the context of its reassessment of the competition rules applicable to Internet commerce in view of the expiry of the Vertical Agreements Block Exemption Regulation in May 2010. These questionnaires will be sent (...)

The French Competition Authority issues a favorable opinion regarding three derogating inter-professional agreements relative to the rules on payment timeframes in the toy, do-it-yourself, watch-making and jewelry sectors
French Competition Authority (Paris)
Press Release published on the official website of the French Competition Authority. Payment timeframes: The Conseil de la concurrence has issued a favourable opinion regarding the derogating agreements signed in the toy, DIY and watch making-jewellery sectors.* Referred to by the Minister of (...)

The French Civil Supreme Court rules that the violation by foreign websites of the obligation to inform consumers on the existence of a copyright levy constitutes unfair competition to a French company (Rue du Commerce / Dabs / Omnisoft and others)
Google (Paris)
Copyright laws of most European Member States provide that the price of storage products such as tapes or discs include a copyright levy, to compensate authors whose work will be copied on these media. The amount of this copyright levy differing from one country to another, resellers of such (...)

The Mannheim Regional Court holds that reciprocal representation agreements concluded between national collecting societies are not void (GEMA / BUMA / STEMRA)
Gleiss Lutz (Munich)
,
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy (Munich)
On 7 November 2008, the Regional Court of Mannheim issued a decision on the validity of territorial limitations contained in reciprocal representation agreements concluded between national collecting societies. The case concerned the question whether a national collecting society was entitled (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal circuit holds the use of cash payments to settle Hatch-Waxman patent litigation does not violate the antitrust laws if the settlement does not exceed the scope of patent and claim for patent validity is not a sham (Bayer / Barr)
Jones Day (Washington DC)
,
Jones Day (Washington DC)
On October 15, 2008, the Federal Circuit joined the growing list of federal courts to hold that the use of cash payments to settle Hatch-Waxman patent litigation does not violate the antitrust laws as long as (1) the settlement excludes no more competition than would the patent itself and (2) (...)

The Haarlem District Court rules on a dispute between the Dutch collecting society and the UK collecting society regarding the licensing of portfolio (BUMA / PRS)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In a judgment dated 19 August 2008 (published only recently), the District Court of Haarlem in the Netherlands ruled on a dispute between the Dutch collecting society BUMA (“BUMA”) and the UK collecting society Performing Right Society Limited (“PRS”), regarding the licensing by BUMA of PRS‘ (...)

The EU Commission prohibits collecting societies from restricting competition into the conditions for the management and licensing of authors’ public performance rights for musical works (CISAC)
DG COMP (Brussels)
,
DG COMP (Brussels)
"The CISAC decision - creating competition between collecting societies for music rights"* I. Introduction On 16 July 2008 the European Commission adopted a decision prohibiting 24 European collecting societies from restricting competition as regards the conditions for the management and (...)

The EFTA Court issues landmark ruling concerning exhaustion of trademark rights (L’Oréal / Per Aarskog / Nille / Smart Club)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 8 July 2008, the EFTA Court issued a judgment concerning the interpretation of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trademarks (the “Trademark Directive”), in which it adopted the principle of mandatory EEA-wide exhaustion of trademark (...)

The Paris Commercial Court condemns a leading auction website to pay damages to perfume makers for a violation of their selective distribution networks (eBay)
Altana Law (Paris)
On 30 June 2008, the Commercial Court of Paris (Tribunal de Commerce de Paris) rendered three important decisions condemning the international auction website eBay mainly for its participation to an infringement of the IP rights of six manufacturers of luxury products belonging to the Louis (...)

The Dutch Supreme Court considers burden of proof in trade mark exhaustion case (Joop! / Jil Sander / Davidoff / Lancaster)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 18 April 2008, the Dutch Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) handed down a judgment relating to the burden of proof in a trade mark exhaustion case. The judgment refines earlier case-law on the matter. In the case at hand, various luxury cosmetic brands, including Joop!, Jil Sander and Davidoff, had (...)

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission again moves forward against "reverse payment settlements" in pharmaceutical patent settlements (Cephalon)
Allen & Overy (New York)
,
RPCK Rastegar Panchal
On February 13th, 2008 the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia charging Cephalon, Inc. with illegally preventing competition to its branded drug Provigil. In its complaint the FTC alleges that Cephalon, through patent (...)

The UK High Court considers whether a no-challenge provision in a patent settlement agreement is unenforceable on the basis that it was in breach of Art. 81 EC (Knorr-Bremse Systems / Haldex Brake)
European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)
In the context of a ruling on jurisdiction, which determined that a UK company is not bound by the terms of a German settlement agreement relating to a patent dispute, the English High Court considers, without deciding the issue, whether a no-challenge provision in a patent settlement agreement (...)

The Turkish Competition Authority adopts block exemption guidelines on technology transfer agreements on the basis of EC Reg. N° 772/2004
Erdem & Erdem (Istanbul)
The Turkish Competition Authority (hereinafter referred as “Authority”) has recently adopted a communiqué entitled as “Communiqué on the Block Exemption Related to the Technology Transfer Agreements” (hereinafter referred as “Communiqué”) numbered 2008/2 on the basis of the European Commission (...)

The Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court quashes an NCA decision penalising agreements thwarting parallel imports of premium branded beverages (Diageo Brands)
Kinstellar (Sofia)
The first two sections of the article are derived from another article by the same author concerning the NCA decision in the case ; see Dessislava Fessenko, The Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition fined foreign-based suppliers for thwarting parallel imports of premium branded (...)

The Bulgarian Competition Authority holds than an exclusive and indefinite duration brand licence is valid as it does not aim at restricting or distorting competition but also grants leniency (Unilever / Kaliakra)
In a potentially far-reaching case, the Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition (the Commission or CPC) addressed the balance between licensing rights and competition regulation. In 2000, a well-established Bulgarian producer of vegetal oils and fats, Kaliakra AD (Kaliakra), (...)

The Frankfurt Higher Regional Court decides on the relationship between trademark and title protection law on the one hand and competition law on the other hand (Harry Potter)
Gleiss Lutz (Munich)
,
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy (Munich)
On 11 April 2007, the German Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt issued a decision on the relationship between copyright, trademark and title protection law on the one hand and competition law on the other hand. The question at stake was whether restrictive clauses concerning the distribution of (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit holds that the reverse payment settlement between branded and generic pharma companies did not violate the antitrust laws because the exclusionary effect of the agreement did not exceed the "scope of the patent" (Tamoxifen Citrate)
Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider (Hartford)
Over the past decade, practitioners, policy makers and commentators have increasingly debated the issues involved when the antitrust laws intersect with patent rights. Both the antitrust and patent laws are designed to promote competition and, as a result, societal wellbeing. However, the (...)

The Paris Court of First Instance rules on the anticompetitive effect of a patent infringement collective complaint lodged against a search engine’s adwords system (Gifam / Google)
DS Avocats (Paris)
AdWords is Google’s flagship advertising product, and its main source of revenue. It offers pay-per-click advertising, and site-targeted advertising for both text and banner ads. But many of the words sold by Google to its clients are registered trademarks and Google has been recently facing (...)

The Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition fines foreign-based suppliers for thwarting parallel imports of premium branded beverages (BG IN / Diageo Brands)
Kinstellar (Sofia)
By Decision n° 136 of 22 June 2006 (the “CPC decision”), the Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition (the “CPC”) fined three foreign-based beverage suppliers for preventing parallel imports of premium branded alcohols into Bulgaria. The CPC decision is noteworthy for introducing the (...)

The US DoJ requires two digital jukebox undertakings to end an illegal non-compete agreement (NSM / Ecast)
Jones Day (Washington DC)
On September 2, 2005, the DOJ Antitrust Division issued a complaint and proposed settlement involving two digital jukebox companies — NSM Music Group Ltd.(NSM) and Ecast Inc. (Ecast) — that allegedly entered into an unlawful agreement pursuant to which NSM agreed not to enter the U.S. market with (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upholds the finding of the FTC that the prohibition of discounts and advertising was inherently suspect as they would tend to raise prices and reduce output (PolyGram)
Sheppard Mullin (Los Angeles)
DC Circuit Hits High Note In “Three Tenors” Case – Petition For Review Of FTC Decision In Polygram Holding, Inc. Denied* On July 22, 2005, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied a petition for review filed by PolyGram Holding, Inc. In so doing, the DC Circuit, in an (...)

The German Federal Court declares settlement concerning royalties for shipments to countries outside the territorial scope of a patent to be void (Abgasreinigungsvorrichtung)
Helmut Schmidt University of the Armed Forces (Hamburg)
I. Facts of the case and case history The claimant/licensee produces devices for cleaning exhaust fumes. The defendant/licensor owns a European patent protecting a specified process for cleaning exhaust fumes, with territorial effect (seeEuropean Patent Convention, Art. 3) in Germany, France, (...)

The US Court of Appeals holds that the reverse payment settlement between a branded and generic pharma companies did not violate the antitrust laws because the exclusionary effect of the agreement did not exceed the "scope of the patent" (Schering-Plough)
Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider (Hartford)
Over the past decade, practitioners, policy makers and commentators have increasingly debated the issues involved when the antitrust laws intersect with patent rights. Both the antitrust and patent laws are designed to promote competition and, as a result, societal wellbeing. However, the (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reverses the ruling of the Lower Court maintaining that a rebuttable presumption arises from the possession of patent rights to tying engineered fastening systems (Independent Ink / Illinois Tool Works)
Sheppard Mullin (Los Angeles)
Of Bats And Sunshine: Presumption Of Market Power In Patent Tying Case Alive But Rebuttable* In January, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Independent Ink Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc.. Addressing the issue whether, in a Section 1 tying case, a rebuttable (...)

The Gravenhage Court of Appeal considers that although the licensor could not compel the licensee to comply with contractual provisions that were void under article 81 EC, the licensor was however not precluded from terminating the agreement according to the terms of the latter (Dekker / Sunfield)
European Commission - DG HR (Brussels)
Dekker is active in the market for the improvement of chrysanthemum species and owns the cultivation rights of certain species. Its market share is estimated at 25% of the Dutch market. Sunfield is active in the breeding of chrysanthemum species and sells cultivation material to cultivators. (...)

The EU Commission adopts new safe harbor for licensing of patents, know-how, and software copyright
Brussels School of Competition (Brussels)
,
DG COMP (Brussels)
,
Latham & Watkins (Brussels)
"Commission adopts new safe harbour for licensing of patents, know-how and software copyright"* The European Commission has adopted on the 7th of April new rules for applying competition policy to the licensing of patents, know-how and software copyright. The new block exemption regulation, (...)

The US Court of Appeals holds that if the terms of pay for delay settlements between the brand name and generic pharma companies are within the "scope of the patent" antitrust law is not implicated (Abbott / Geneva / Zenith)
Hill, Kertscher & Wharton (Atlanta)
,
Eversheds Sutherland (Atlanta)
A recent 11th Circuit case, Valley Drug Co. v. Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., sheds light on the complex intersection of patent and antitrust law in the context of a settlement agreement between a name brand pharmaceutical manufacturer and two allegedly infringing generic manufacturers that (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit holds that a reverse payment agreement between a brand name pharmaceutical company and a potential competitor is to be analyzed under the "scope of the patent" test to determine antitrust liability (Abbott / Geneva / Zenith)
United First Partners (New York)
Introduction In Valley Drug Co. v. Geneva Pharm., Inc. (“Valley Drug”), the Eleventh Circuit adopted the “scope of the patent” test to evaluate validity of reverse payment agreements between a brand-name pharmaceutical manufacturer and generic would-be competitors. The court viewed the case in (...)

The EU Commission settles allegations of abuse and clears patent pools in the CD market (Sony / Philips)
European Commission - DG MARE
Commission settles allegations of abuse and clears patent pools in the CD market 1. The complaints Several manufacturers of pre-recorded CD discs (that is CD discs that include already content – music or software – provided by content-owners) lodged complaints against Philips and Sony a number (...)

The US Court of Appeals holds that a reverse payment agreement between a brand name pharmaceutical manufacturer and a potential competitor is a per se antitrust violation because the agreement exceeded the "scope of the patent" (Cardizem)
United First Partners (New York)
Introduction In re Cardizem CD Antitrust Litigation (“Cardizem”) is one of the first in a long line of cases challenging the so-called reverse payment or pay-for-delay settlement agreements between the pharmaceutical companies. In Cardizem, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held (...)

The EU Commission clears agreements to set up and operate a world-wide mechanism to evaluate, certify and license patents for third generation mobile communications systems (3G3P)
European Commission (Brussels)
"Competition law analysis of patent licensing arrangements — the particular case of 3G3P"* On 12 November 2002, the Commission’s Competition Directorate-General cleared agreements to set up and operate a world-wide mechanism to evaluate, certify and license essential patents for third generation (...)

The EU Commission exempts a standard agreement entered into by a number of copyright administration societies from Europe, South America, Asia and New Zealand (IFPI Simulcasting)
DLA Piper (Lisbon)
"From discothèques to websites, a new approach to music copyright licensing: the Simulcasting decision"* On 8 October 2002 the Commission adopted a decision in case COMP/C2/38.014 IFPI Simulcasting exempting a standard agreement entered into by a number of copyright administration societies (...)

The U.S. FTC publishes a report on generic drug entry prior to patent expiration raising issues on patent-shortening settlement agreements
White & Case (Washington)
The Federal Trade Commission’s recent report, Generic Drug Entry Prior to Patent Expiration (Federal Trade Commission, Generic Drug Entry Prior to Patent Expiration: An FTC Study, July 2002, ("FTC Report")), raises a number of competition issues that merit further discussion and research. This (...)

The EU Commission issues an evaluation report on the transfer of technology block exemption regulation
Brussels School of Competition (Brussels)
,
DG COMP (Brussels)
"Review of the block exemption Regulation on technology transfer agreements"* While the Block Exemption Regulation n° 240 on transfer of technology (hereafter ‘TTBE’) is expected to apply until 31 March 2006, Article 12 requires the Commission to carry out regular assessments of the application (...)

The EU Commission rejects an application for interim measures lodged by luxury car manufacturer concerning possible abuses of trademark rights (Vickers / Rolls-Royce)
Studio Legale Clarizia (Rome)
"Vickers/Rolls-Royce"* On 6 April 1998, the Commission adopted a Decision rejecting an application for interim measures lodged by Vickers PLC. On the occasion, it pointed out that, at the stage of a prima facie appraisal, the assessment under competiton law of a clause granting the trade mark (...)

The OECD holds a roundtable on application of competition policy to high tech markets
OECD - Competition Division (Paris)
Key documents: Background note Technological innovation has significant welfare implications. Competitive markets provide incentives to innovate, and innovation can be a catalyst for further competition. But economic analysis provides limited insight into the relationship between competition (...)

The EU Commission clears interim intellectual property rights arrangements in the telecommunications industry (ETSI)
DG COMP (Brussels)
"ETSI IPR Policy"* The Commission issued a negative clearance-type comfort letter with respect to ETSI‘s (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) Interim IPR Policy. The intellectual property rights arrangements which ETSI developed and notified to the Commission, provided that members (...)

The UK Competition Authority welcomes the EU Court of Justice’s ruling in a pay-for-delay case (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
CMA welcomes EU Court ruling in pay-for-delay drug case* The CMA welcomes a ruling from the EU Court of Justice in relation to its case that drug companies supplying an antidepressant called paroxetine broke the law. The ruling, released today, follows appeals from GlaxoSmithKline and other (...)

The French Competition Authority fines a pharmaceutical laboratory €25 million for delaying entry into the market of the generic version of a drug and for hindering its development through disparagement campaigns (Janssen-cilag / Johnson & Johnson)
Franklin (Paris)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
THE FRENCH COMPETITION AUTHORITY FINES A PHARMACEUTICAL LABORATORY EUR 25 MILLION FOR ANTI-GENERIC PRACTICES* On 20 December 2017, the French Competition Authority (the FCA) imposed a EUR 25 million fine on a pharmaceutical laboratory, for delaying entry onto the market of the generic version (...)

The UK Competition Authority alleges that two pharmaceutical companies have concluded a pay-for-delay agreement (Actavis / Concordia)
United Kingdom’s Competition Authority - CMA (London)
CMA alleges anti-competitive agreements for hydrocortisone tablets* The CMA today alleged that Concordia and Actavis signed illegal agreements which enabled high prices for a life-saving drug to be prolonged. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) alleges that between January 2013 and (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals of several manufacturers of medicines involved in an agreement seeking to delay the marketing of the generic antidepressant citalopram (Lundbeck)
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Dusseldorf)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
On 25 March 2021, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") dismissed all the appeals against the European Commission’s decision to fine Lundbeck and several other companies for entering into anti-competitive patent settlement agreements. The judgments largely repeat the position taken by the ECJ (...)

The US District Court for the District of Massachusetts rejects a request for a new trial to challenge a pay-for-delay agreement (Nexium)
Wolters Kluwer (Riverwoods)
Judgment for Drug Companies Unlikely the End of the Road in Nexium Case* The federal district court in Boston has rejected a request from purchasers of AstraZeneca LP’s heartburn medication Nexium for a new trial to challenge a “reverse payment” or “pay-for-delay” agreement between AstraZeneca and (...)

The US District Court for the District of New Jersey notes that even if a Court accepts the premise of a reverse non-monetary payment, plaintiffs may allege facts to allow an estimate of the monetary value of that settlement or risk facing dismissal (Lipitor)
Siemens (New York)
,
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Plausibly Alleging Non-monetary Settlements as Reverse Payments After Actavis* In In re Lipitor Antitrust Litigation, No. 12 Civ. 2389 (D.N.J.), U.S. District Judge Peter G. Sheridan has confirmed his prior ruling that under the Supreme Court’s decisions in Twombly, Iqbal, and FTC v. Actavis, (...)

The US Supreme Court declines to review a Second Circuit ruling permitting a reverse-payment settlement between a branded and generic pharmaceutical manufacturer (Lousiana Wholesale Drug / Bayer)
Vinson & Elkins (Washington)
,
Reese Gordon Marketos (Dallas)
A growing consensus among federal courts that so-called “reverse-payment” settlements rarely violate antitrust law has not tempered antitrust enforcement authorities’ opposition to such deals. In the pharmaceutical industry, brand-name drug manufacturers may file patent infringement lawsuits (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania allows the reverse payment suits to proceed when finding that the agreements extended beyond the scope of the concerned patent (Cephalon)
Stanford University - Stanford Law School
U.S. District Court allows Provigil reverse payment suits to proceed* On 29 March 2010 the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania rejected defendants’ motions to dismiss in suits concerning reverse payment settlements between the brand name manufacturer of the (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismisses antitrust claims against a reverse payment agreement between pharmaceutical companies (Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride)
ArbJournal (Richmond)
On 15 October 2008 the Federal Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment by the Court for the Eastern District of New York that patent settlement agreements («Agreements») entered into between Bayer AG and Bayer Corp (collectively «Bayer») and several manufacturers of generic drugs providing (...)

The US Federal Circuit Court finds that the district court exceeded its authority in shortening the statutory stay of entry by a generic competitor which was challenged by a pharmaceutical patent-holder manufacturer in a patent infringement suit (Andrx / Biovail)
Cabot (Boston)
Judges: Dyk (author), Bryson, and Linn In Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Biovail Corp., No. 01-1650 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 17, 2002), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a lower court’s order (1) shortening the statutory thirty-month delay of FDA approval of Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s (“Andrx”) (...)

The Finnish Competition Authority releases a report concerning the lack of uniformity among authorities in licensing and supervision practices
Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority (Helsinki)
FCCA: Lack of uniformity in licensing and supervision practices hurt the ability of companies to operate on the market* The lack of uniformity among authorities in licensing and supervision practices make it more difficult for companies to enter the field and expand their operations, according (...)

Dominance

The EU Commission opens a formal investigation into possible anticompetitive conduct of a global pharmaceutical company in relation to a blockbuster multiple sclerosis medicine (Teva)
DG COMP (Brussels)
Antitrust: Commission opens formal investigation into possible anticompetitive conduct of Teva in relation to a blockbuster multiple sclerosis medicine* The European Commission has opened a formal antitrust investigation to assess whether the pharmaceutical company Teva has illegally delayed (...)

The EU Commission investigates for the first time a case relating to divisional patent filing and litigation strategies in the pharmaceutical sector (Teva)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
On 4 March 2021 the EU Commission announced it has launched a formal investigation into possible anti-competitive conduct by pharmaceutical company Teva in relation to its blockbuster drug Copaxone, which is used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. The patent for the active ingredient in (...)

The EU Commission accepts a commitment to reduce the price of six cancer medicines by 73% in excessive pricing case in the pharmaceutical industry (Aspen)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 10 February 2021, the Commission announced that it had accepted a series of pricing and supply commitments from Aspen, thereby bringing an end to its investigation into whether Aspen had infringed Article 102 TFEU by charging excessive prices for six off-patent cancer medicines. Having (...)

The Japanese FTC and the Government propose draft guidelines for business collaboration between large companies and startups for the purpose of promoting open innovation and ensuring fair and free competitive environments
White & Case (Tokyo)
,
White & Case (Tokyo)
,
White & Case (Tokyo)
On December 23, 2020, the Japan Fair Trade Commission ("JFTC") and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry ("METI") proposed a draft of Guidelines for Business Collaboration with Startups ("Guidelines") for the purpose of promoting open innovation and ensuring fair and free competitive (...)

The Italian Competition Authority fines main national ticket operator €10.9 million for abuse of dominant position (TicketOne)
Bird & Bird (Rome)
,
Bird & Bird (Rome)
On 22 December 2020, the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) issued an important decision fining CTS Eventim €10.9 million for having implemented an unlawful exclusive strategy in the Italian market of pop music events ticket sellers. In September 2018, the AGCM launched an investigation (...)

The Spanish Competition Authority opens an investigation against a national football federation for abuse of dominant position (RFEF)
Bird & Bird (Madrid)
,
Ecija & Asociados (Madrid)
The sale and use of audio-visual football rights in Spain has always been in the spotlight due to frequent controversies between the Spanish Football Federation (“RFEF”), the national professional football league (“LaLiga”) and the football clubs. At a national level, LaLiga organises the first (...)

The Czech Competition Authority rejects an appeal from a collecting society for music authors and confirms the fine for abuse of dominant position (Osa)
Bird & Bird (Prague)
,
Bird & Bird (Prague)
The Czech Office for the Protection of Competition ("Office") published a press release (without publishing the full decisions yet) regarding the rejection of the appeal of the collecting society for music authors’ rights OSA - Ochranný svaz autorský pro práva k dílům hudebním, z.s. ("OSA"), and (...)

The Regional Court of Düsseldorf questions the EU Court of Justice on standard essential patents licensing in supply chains (Nokia / Daimler)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Dusseldorf)
,
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Washington)
,
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Dusseldorf)
In a decision of November 26, 2020 in a patent infringement case of Nokia Technologies Oy against Daimler AG, the Düsseldorf Regional Court (file number 4c O 17/19) referred several questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) regarding the licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs) (...)

The Regional Court of Düsseldorf refers questions regarding the licensing of standard essential patents in multi-layered supply chains to the EU Court of Justice (Nokia / Daimler)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 26 November 2020, the Regional Court of Düsseldorf (“Düsseldorf Court”) decided to request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) in patent infringement proceedings involving Nokia and Daimler. The questions give the ECJ the opportunity to offer guidance on (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by a Belgian collecting society is not abusive (SABAM)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 November 2020, the Court of Justice ((“ECJ”) delivered a judgment in Case C-327/19, ruling that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by the Belgian collecting society SABAM is not necessarily abusive under Article 102 TFEU. The case came before the ECJ by way of a (...)

The EU Court of Justice states that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by collecting societies is not necessarily abusive (SABAM)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 November 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) delivered a judgment in case C-372/19 holding that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by collecting societies such as SABAM is not necessarily abusive under Article 102 TFEU. The case had come before (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules on the royalty mechanism of a Belgian collecting society in a situation of de facto monopoly (SABAM / W.W, WCD)
University Paris Saclay
,
University Paris Saclay
,
University Paris Saclay
On 25 November 2020, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) handed down its preliminary ruling in response to the request by the Ondernemingsrechtbank Antwerp as to the interpretation of Article 102 TFEU. The disagreement between Weareone.World and Wecandance on one side, and SABAM, a Belgian (...)

The Belgian Competition Authority imposes interim measures requested by a football club following an appeal judgment (Virton / RBFA)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 19 November 2020, the Competition College (Mededingingscollege / Collège de la concurrence) of the Belgian Competition Authority (Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit / Autorité belge de la Concurrence - the BCA) imposed interim measures on the Royal Belgian Football Association (the RBFA) at the (...)

The EU Court of Auditors encourages the Commission to tighten the screws on ‘big tech’
Loyens & Loeff (Amsterdam)
,
Loyens & Loeff (Amsterdam)
European Court of Auditors encourages European Commission to tighten the screws on ‘Big Tech’* The Court of Auditors believes that the introduction of new instruments should go hand in hand with stricter enforcement of existing instruments In a Special Report published on 19 November 2020, the (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down a judgment in a competition damage litigation and makes key observations on when a judicial decision of the EU courts is binding in other proceedings (Servier)
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
Holds Findings Made by European Courts Cannot Be Relied on in Different Context in Other Proceedings On November 6, 2020 the U.K. Supreme Court handed down a judgment relating to the Servier U.K. competition damages litigation, in which it made key observations on when a judicial decision of (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice rules on burden of proof for showing exhaustion of trade mark right (Amazon / Coty)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 15 October 2020, the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) issued a judgment on the burden of proof for showing the exhaustion of trademark rights in a case pitting Coty against Amazon. After having made a test purchase from Amazon of two bottles of a perfume bearing the “JOOP!” trademark on (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal confirms Competition Authority’s decision ordering a search engine to negotiate with news agencies and press publishers (Google)
Ashurst (Paris)
On 8 October 2020, the Paris Court of Appeal rejected Google’s challenge to the French Competition Authority’s ("FCA") decision compelling Google to negotiate "neighbouring rights" with news agencies and press publishers. "Neighbouring rights" include the right to receive payment when a (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reverses a judgment that upheld “skinny labels” and allowed a generic to launch on uses not covered by a patent (GlaxoSmithKline / Teva)
Rutgers University (Camden)
On October 2, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s judgment in favor of defendant Teva in a case involving “skinny labels.” GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 976 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2020). When a drug can be used to treat multiple (...)

The US FTC requests rehearing en banc by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of global semiconductor company’s standard-essential patent licensing practices (Qualcomm)
US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Washington)
FTC Requests Rehearing En Banc of Qualcomm Appeals Panel Decision* The Federal Trade Commission today filed a petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit requesting rehearing en banc of the August 11, 2020, decision of a panel of that court in the matter of FTC v. Qualcomm (...)

The Regional Court of Munich rules in favor of an electronic manufacturer in standard essential patent proceeding (Sharp / Daimler)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 10 September 2020, the Regional Court of Munich (“Munich Court”) ruled in favour of Sharp that Daimler had infringed a standard essential patent (“SEP”) of Sharp. Sharp is the patent holder of EP 2667676B1 which is standard essential for the Long-Term Evolution (“LTE”) telecommunications (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules in a licence dispute between a software and a telecommunication company and clarifies the English Courts’ approach to FRAND royalty cases (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 26 August 2020, the UK Supreme Court issued a judgment in a licence dispute involving Standard Essential Patents (“SEPs”) pitting Unwired Planet, a US based patent assertion entity, against Huawei, a Chinese telecommunications company that produces smartphones. Unwired Planet brought an (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rules that there is no antitrust violation in a multinational semiconductor company’s licensing of its standard-essential patents (Qualcomm)
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC (Boston)
,
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC (Washington)
,
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC (New York)
Ninth Circuit Reverses FTC Win in FTC v. Qualcomm, Finding No Antitrust Violations from Qualcomm’s Licensing of its Standard-Essential Patents* In a reversal that came as no surprise to many observers, on Tuesday, August 11, 2020, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit strikes down sweeping injunction against semiconductor company and reins in expansive interpretation of Sherman Act (Qualcomm)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (New York)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington DC)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington DC)
On August 11, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decisively reversed the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC or Commission) controversial district court win challenging Qualcomm’s licensing practices. In rejecting every aspect of the lower court’s decision, the Ninth Circuit panel (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reverses a ruling finding that a semiconductor company abuses its dominant position regarding its standard-essential patents (Qualcomm)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (New York)
On August 11, 2020, a Ninth Circuit panel reversed the District Court for the Northern District of California’s judgment in FTC v. Qualcomm, Inc. The panel held that Qualcomm’s conduct—(a) refusing to license its standards essential patents (SEPs) to rival chipset manufacturers; (b) refusing to (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturns a ruling finding that a semiconductor company’s licensing practice abused dominant position (Qualcomm)
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
,
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
,
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
On 11 August 2020, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”), in a unanimous opinion by Judge Callahan, reversed the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC’s”) win in the district court against Qualcomm Inc. (“Qualcomm”) and upheld Qualcomm’s licensing practices, (...)

The Slovak Competition Authority initiates administrative proceedings in the matter of a possible abuse of a dominant position in carrying out collective management of rights
Slovak Competition Authority (Bratislava)
ABUSE OF A DOMINANT POSITION: AMO SR initiated an administrative proceedings in the matter of a possible abuse of a dominant position in carrying out collective management of rights* On 20 July 2020 the Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, the Division of Abuse of a Dominant Position (...)

The EU Court of Justice Advocate General Pitruzzella guides on the method for calculating royalties that may lead to an abuse of dominance of a Belgian collecting society (SABAM)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 16 July 2020, Advocate General (“AG”) Pitruzzella issued an opinion in Case C-327/19, advising the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) on whether the method for calculating royalties used by SABAM, the Belgian collecting society, amounts to an abuse of a dominant position under (...)