[ad_1]
For the Swiss it is about survival, for the Germans it is about the future of their research. Everyone else can learn from a cleaning agent’s patent dispute how not to do it.
Instead of the knowledge about sustainable detergents spreading in the market, a patent dispute has arisen.
They are an unlikely couple who met Wednesday in Federal Patent Court in St. Gallen: Werner & Mertz, maker of the cleaning agent “Frosch,” sued Good Soaps, a small Lucerne company.
The background: A process was developed to produce cleaning agents from rapeseed oil about ten years ago. The invention fits the zeitgeist. For a long time, cleaning agents were made from coconut or palm oil. The fact that native oils can be used for this today is a step forward in terms of sustainability.
But instead of knowledge of the process spreading throughout the industry, it has become legal fodder. The invention is claimed by both parties. The patent was applied for in 2011 by a Lucerne Good Soaps partner company.
One story, two versions
Lucerne’s version of the story goes like this: Good Soaps founder Regine Schneider invented the new process and wanted it to be patented. Werner & Mertz defended themselves against the patents with objections, arguing that the innovation did not meet the requirements for a patent. When it became foreseeable that the patent would nevertheless be granted, Werner & Mertz claimed the invention.
The other side disagrees. It was not Regine Schneider who made the invention, but a long time employee of Werner & Mertz. Before Regine Schneider founded Good Soaps, she worked for a company called Kolb. Werner & Mertz worked with Kolb, and therefore also with Ms. Schneider, for research purposes. In 2009, Ms. Schneider learned about the invention in a joint meeting. She used the innovation for her own patent application.
The third company, Kolb, declined to comment on the NZZ.
It’s about a lot of money
The parties to the dispute risked a lot of money. The lawsuit estimates the value of the patent at half a million francs, plus legal fees in the five-digit range for both parties. Whoever loses the hearing will have to pay court fees and the other party will have to refund legal fees. If the parties to the dispute do not reach an agreement at the last minute, the losing side could receive a bill of up to an estimated 280,000 francs.
This commitment is high, especially for the small business. Good Soaps is all about existence, writes the “Luzerner Zeitung” in an article in mid-August. For Werner & Mertz, future research activities are at stake, says the head of research. It could be compromised if Good Soaps gets the patent.
Formulate patent applications carefully
Most patent disputes are settled out of court. Only about two dozen cases are filed in the Federal Patent Court each year. The obstacles for a court to agree with the plaintiff and therefore deny the patent applicant the invention are high. Werner & Mertz not only has to prove that its employees made the invention before Regine Scheider, but also that Regine Schneider got the knowledge for the innovation from Werner & Mertz. Ultimately, the court must be able to rule out that both parties did not make the same invention.
Innovation rarely happens in a quiet room. Most of the time, the development of complex procedures occurs through collaboration, ”says patent attorney Martin Wilming, who is observing the case from the outside. “Who developed exactly what and when is often difficult to prove in hindsight.” Written agreements could help avoid costly court cases: cooperation agreements, nondisclosure agreements, meeting minutes.
“Furthermore, patent applications should always be carefully formulated so that third-party contributions are not included,” says Wilming, “otherwise, patent applicants run the risk that a third party also has rights to the patent through their contribution. That complicates property and use rights. “
What do the parties to the dispute learn from the matter? “Confidence is good, control is better,” says Edgar Endlein, head of research at Werner & Mertz. In the future, he does not want to enter into any cooperation without proper documentation, he said on Wednesday afternoon after the negotiation.
Remo Richli, CFO of Good Soaps, responds more fundamentally: “We have to think about how we can promote innovation. This is important for Europe as a business location. “He would like to see better networking of small businesses that are in a similar situation.
It will likely take several months for the verdict to be delivered. Until now, lawyers in particular have benefited from this kind of soap opera somewhat differently.
