EPO and ITU cooperate to improve transparency in patents and ICT standards

No items found.
May 27, 2011
#
Digital

The European Patent Office (EPO) and the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which creates Information and Communication Technology (ICT) standards, have announced that they have signed an agreement to share information to help improve the quality of patents. This is the first agreement that the ITU has ever concluded with a patent office.

Standards define certain minimum criteria that, if followed, help to improve interoperability amongst products that might otherwise not work together. For example, standards relating to the GSM technology make sure that mobile phones work across different networks in various countries. Thus, standards aim to create a level playing field on which companies can compete by using common platforms that ensure freedom of user choice.

By contrast, a patent provides an exclusive right that allows a patentee to exclude others from practising the patented invention. If the implementation of a particular standard necessitates use of a technology protected by one or more so-called “essential” patents, the patentee could use the essential patent to prevent implementation of the standard, although often a patentee licenses the patented invention to boost their licensing revenue.

During the standard-setting process, members submit a wide range of draft proposals, some of which are adopted in a given standard. Whether or not the submissions are adopted in the standard, they can still count as prior art against patent applications filed after these submissions are made. The agreement between the EPO and the ITU will enable the EPO to gain access to all ITU documentation, and eventually make it available to its examiners in a searchable form. This might seem like a fairly inconsequential development when the EPO has access to such a large amount of potential prior art already, but it could have a huge impact on patent quality. In the telecommunications field, it has been estimated that 35% of all prior art citations relied upon by the EPO originate from Standard Setting Organisations, such as the ITU.

For the ITU, this agreement will allow them to link their patent database to the EPO’s database, which will help them to assess whether a particular technology that may be relevant to a standard is patented. This can improve the legal certainty for the implementers of standards, as is evident from the dispute surrounding the JPEG standard for digital image compression. A patentee asserted that it owned patent rights covering the JPEG technology approximately 10 years after the JPEG standard was issued, as a result catching the implementers of the JPEG standards unaware.

The EPO has previously made similar information-sharing agreements with the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standards Association, which creates standards relating to electrical and electronic technologies and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), which produces standards in the field of telecommunications.

It is expected that this agreement will benefit patentees, implementers of standards and consumers, while also improving the quality of patents that relate to technology that may cover, or be covered by, standards.

Recent Case Reports

Prosecution history in claim interpretation at the EPO
10 June 2026
In Agathon v Intercom, the UPC's Milan Local Division confirmed that statements made during EPO prosecution are not binding but can offer low-weight guidance on the skilled person's view — here narrowing 'abuts' against the patentee.
Revocation of an order to inspect and preserve evidence as Applicant did not start proceedings on the merits, R. 198.1 RoP
09 June 2026
In Otec v Steros, the UPC's Dusseldorf Local Division revoked an ex parte inspection order after the applicant failed to sue on the merits in time, ordering all preserved evidence returned and destroyed.
UPC Court of Appeal reverses infringement ruling in both Germany and UK
05 June 2026
On 2 June 2026 the UPC Court of Appeal overturned the Mannheim Local Division's infringement findings against Kodak in both Germany and the UK, on a prior user right in Germany, and on lack of defendant liability in the UK, while upholding the validity of EP 3511174 as amended and laying down a structured framework for exercising jurisdiction over non-EU designations.