The European Commission recently released figures on EU patent protection which show that 20 years’ protection in Europe is on average nearly nine times more expensive than in Japan or the US.
In large part, these costs result from translation requirements.
A patent from the European Patent Office (EPO) granted in one of the EPO’s working languages – English, French or German – until very recently needed to be translated into the language of every country where it ought to be valid. Needless to say, translating all patent documents into multiple languages bumps up the costs for an EPO patent. Inventors therefore think twice before they apply for IP protection across Europe – which in turn prevents them from reaping the commercial benefits of their technology.
Thankfully, the London Agreement – which came into force on May 1 – will improve the situation for Europe’s innovators by simplify the translation requirements for European patents.
It is an optional treaty and has been ratified by 13 countries so far, including Germany, France, the UK, the Netherlands and Denmark. Under the Agreement, countries which share an EPO working language will recognize EPO patents without translation. For instance, a patent granted in German can now be recognized in France, the UK and Switzerland as is – because both English and German are EPO working languages.
Other signatory states will only ask for a translation of the claims — the legal description of the invention — into their national languages. Some countries will also demand an English translation of the technical description of the invention. However, even with the technical translation added, the represents a significant reduction of the language requirements for obtaining patent protection in these states.
With translation costs accounting for up to 40% of the cost of a patent, the magnitude of savings that the London Agreement offers SMEs is clear.
At the same time, the Agreement acknowledges the realities of conducting business and research in Europe. In the age of globalization, businesses serve at least a European (if not a global) market where IP protection across borders has become the norm. Reducing the cost of European patents has therefore taken on an unprecedented urgency.
Most of the patent translations under the preceding system were never even actually consulted and did not serve any practical purpose. To suppose that patent translations would help to inform the general public about the latest technologies is hopelessly unrealistic. A technical education is needed in order to understand patent claims and descriptions even in one’s mother tongue.
Most importantly, however, the London Agreement could pave the way to a genuine European Community Patent with additional benefits. A Community title would be automatically valid in the entire Union of 27 member states. And it would harmonize IP litigation in Europe, a source of great concern to SME innovators.
As the current European patents are a bundle of national patents, they need to be separately enforced in each jurisdiction — without any certainty that they will be consistently upheld across Europe. The London Agreement sends a signal that a genuinely European patent system is still possible. Eventually it could deliver the cost savings, simplicity and legal certainty that inventive SMEs are desperate for.