Jump to content
Patents in the Food Sector / Consequences of the patentability of food-related substances
Patents in the Food Sector / Consequences of the patentability of food-related substances
Contents
Chapter
Expand
|
Collapse
Page
2–12
Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
2–12
Details
13–14
Abbreviations
13–14
Details
15–15
Index of Tables
15–15
Details
16–16
German Index of Tables
16–16
Details
17–19
Introduction
17–19
Details
20–90
Part I. Patentability of food from 1877 to 2005 in Germany compared to 19 Brazil, China, and India
20–90
20–51
A. Patentability of food in Germany
20–51
20–26
I. The exemption in the German Patent Act of 1877
20–26
Details
1. German Patent Act of 1877
Details
2. The scope of the exemption
Details
3. Reactions to the exemption
Details
26–28
II. The Amending Act of 1891 and the Kongorot decision
26–28
Details
28–30
III. The patentability of food in the Amending Act of 1967
28–30
Details
30–48
IV. Consequences of the patentability of food in Germany
30–48
Details
1. Food-related patent applications in the technological and economic sense
Details
2. Rise in food-related German patent applications
Details
a. Overview
Details
b. Dairy and confectionary
Details
c. Feed
Details
d. Plants
Details
3. Rise in food biotechnology-related German patent applications
Details
a. Overview
Details
b. Plant biotechnology
Details
c. Feed biotechnology
Details
d. Biotechnology in other segments of the food sector
Details
4. Development of the German food sector and food prices
Details
48–51
V. Assessment of the exemption in Germany from 1877 to 1967
48–51
Details
51–67
B. Patentability of food under the TRIPs Agreement
51–67
51–63
I. Negotiations with respect to food
51–63
Details
1. The approach of India
Details
2. The approach of Brazil
Details
3. The approach of the U.S.
Details
4. The approach of the European Communities
Details
5. Further negotiations
Details
6. Intermediate result
Details
7. Summary
Details
63–66
II. Contents with respect to food
63–66
Details
66–67
III. Consequences
66–67
Details
67–85
C. Patentability of food in Brazil, China, and India
67–85
67–69
I. Implementation of the TRIPs Agreement in Brazil
67–69
Details
69–71
II. Implementation of the TRIPs Agreement in China
69–71
Details
71–75
III. Implementation of the TRIPs Agreement in India
71–75
Details
75–85
IV. Consequences of the patentability of food-related substances
75–85
Details
1. Rise of food-related patent applications
Details
2. Rise of food biotechnology-related patent applications
Details
3. Development of the food sector and food prices in Brazil
Details
4. Development of the food sector and food prices in China
Details
5. Development of the food sector and food prices in India
Details
85–89
D. Nestlé and patentability of food
85–89
Details
89–90
E. Assessment
89–90
Details
91–114
Part II. Innovation in today's food sector
91–114
91–101
A. Innovation related to the production of agricultural raw materials
91–101
91–99
I. Innovation related to the production of plant-derived agricultural raw materials
91–99
Details
99–101
II. Innovation related to the production of animal-derived agricultural raw materials
99–101
Details
101–110
B. Innovation related to the production of processed food
101–110
101–106
I. Use of microorganisms in the production of processed food
101–106
Details
106–109
II. Functional food
106–109
Details
109–110
III. Nutraceuticals
109–110
Details
110–114
C. Consumer acceptance of innovation in the food sector
110–114
Details
115–165
Part III. Intellectual property situation of today's food sector
115–165
115–136
A. Protection of inventions related to the production of plant-derived raw materials
115–136
115–123
I. Protection under the plant variety protection system
115–123
Details
1. Plant variety as protectable subject matter
Details
2. Conditions of protection
Details
3. Scope of protection
Details
a. Essentially derived plant varieties
Details
b. Exemptions to plant variety protection
Details
4. Assessment
Details
123–131
II. Protection under the Patent System
123–131
Details
1. Scope of protection
Details
2. Term of protection
Details
3. Limitations of protection
Details
a. Research exemption and plant breeders' exemption
Details
b. Farm-saved seed and coincidental production
Details
c. Compulsory license
Details
4. Assessment
Details
131–136
III. Increase in patent applications for non-genetically modified plants
131–136
Details
1. European patent on herbicide-resistant rice
Details
2. Exemption to patentability of essentially biological processes and 134 patentability of artificially induced mutation
Details
3. Assessment
Details
136–136
B. Protection of inventions related to the production of animal-derived raw materials
136–136
Details
136–165
C. Protection of inventions related to the production of processed food
136–165
136–138
I. Patentability of savor nuances
136–138
Details
138–147
II. Food as a macromolecular substance and product-by-process claims
138–147
Details
1. Patentability of product-by-process claims
Details
2. The scope of product-by-process claims
Details
a. The scope of product-by-process claims in Europe
Details
b. The scope of product-by-process claims in the U.S.
Details
aa. The Scripps decision
Details
bb. The Atlantic decision
Details
147–165
III. Food as the product directly obtained by a patented process
147–165
Details
1. Comparison with the protection by product-by-process claims
Details
2. The product directly obtained by a process
Details
3. Interpretation of “directly obtained”
Details
a. Narrow interpretation: chronological approach
Details
b. Broad interpretation: parameter approach
Details
4. Interpretation applicable to food-related inventions
Details
a. Literal interpretation
Details
b. Legislative history of Art. 64(2) EPC
Details
c. Systematic interpretation
Details
d. Teleological interpretation
Details
e. Parameter approach appropriate
Details
5. Burden of proof with regard to the product directly obtained by a process
Details
6. Biological inventions
Details
7. Case study on food products obtained by a patented process
Details
a. The biscuit patent – EP 445 929
Details
aa. Background
Details
bb. The invention of the biscuit patent
Details
cc. Claims and claim interpretation
Details
dd. Impacts for products obtained from the biscuit patent technology
Details
b. Herbicide-tolerant plants – EP 546 090
Details
aa. Background
Details
bb. Technology underlying the patent
Details
cc. Scope with respect to Art. 64(2) EPC
Details
c. Patent on transformation technology – EP 270 615
Details
aa. Background
Details
bb. The Moloney patent and its scope
Details
8. Summary on Art. 64(2) EPC
Details
165–165
D. Summary
165–165
Details
166–206
Final Summary
166–206
Details
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
CC-BY
Access
Patents in the Food Sector , page 75 - 85
Consequences of the patentability of food-related substances
Autoren
Eva Willnegger
DOI
doi.org/10.5771/9783845210230-75
ISBN print: 978-3-8329-3636-5
ISBN online: 978-3-8452-1023-0
Chapter Preview
Chapter Preview
Share
Download PDF
Download citation
RIS
BibTeX
Copy DOI link
doi.org/10.5771/9783845210230-75
Share by email
Video schließen
Share by email Nomos eLibrary
Recipient*
Sender*
Message*
Your name
Send message
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.
