Udo von Kröcher 1 Enforcement of Plant Variety Rights in the Agricultural Sector in Germany Udo von Kröcher Bundessortenamt (Federal Plant Variety Office)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LEGAL AND REGULATORY REGIME FOR ACCESS AND BENEFIT SHARING IN KENYA Presented By: Anne N. Angwenyi National Environment Management Authority (Kenya)
Advertisements

ESA European Seed Association Do the legal tools meet the needs of the breeders? Judith Blokland Lawyer – Plantum NL Member Task Force Farm Saved Seed.
Agrobiodiversity and Intellectual Property Rights: Selected Issues under the FAO International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.
Introduction to basic principles of Regulation (EC) 45/2001 Sophie Louveaux María Verónica Pérez Asinari.
Le présent support ne peut être reproduit sans autorisation 1 Legal case « Pierre Fabre Laboratories»  Is it legal to require the permanent presence of.
EDUCATION Directive 2002/14/EC of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community.
The Transposition of The Information and Consultation Directive A Trade Union Perspective Liam Berney Congress Industrial Officer NUI Galway Center for.
Research Contracts and IP Services TRAINING WORKSHOPS ON HORIZON 2020 – 27 NOV 2014 The Grant Agreement Roger Wallace – Research Contracts & IP Services.
Interface between patent and sui generis systems of protection of plant varieties The 1978 UPOV Act does not allow both systems to be applied to the same.
Rethinking Copyright in the Name of
10. Workshop ERFP Uppsala, June 4, 2005 ERFP collaboration with EU - Lobbying in Bruxelles Hermann Schulte-Coerne.
USING CONSERVATION COVENANTS TO PROTECT PRIVATE LAND Judy Atkins Hillyer Atkins.
Experiences with implementation of Brazilian A & BS Regime and Suggestions for Reform Juliana Santilli.
EU: Bilateral Agreements of Member States
EU: Bilateral Agreements of Member States. Formerly concluded international agreements of Member States with third countries Article 351 TFEU The rights.
THE PROTECTION OF PLANT VARITIES AND FARMERS’ RIGHTS ACT 2001 – INDIA Objectives: –-Protection of the rights of farmers for their contribution made at.
FARM SAVED SEED IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC Ing. Vojtech Dukát 2008.
European payment order Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment.
Existing EU Regulations concerning pesticide statistics and Latvia experience in pesticide statistics Guna Karlsone, CSB of Latvia.
Ornamental plant production and varieties legal protection in Poland Mieczysław Grzesik, Adam Marosz Research Institute of Pomology and Floriculture, Skierniewice,
Plant Variety Protection and Royalty Collection in Germany Meeting of AMSEM on Klaus Schlünder.
1 INTERREG IIIB “ATLANTIC AREA” Main points of community regulation 438/2001 financial management and control systems EUROPEAN COMMISSION SPAIN.
Chapter 26 Chapter 11: Plan Confirmation. Disclosure Statement Hearing The disclosure statement hearing is the first step in the Chapter 11 reorganization.
Re – use of PSI in Slovenia Kristina Kotnik Šumah Deputy of the Information Commisoner.
II.INTERNATIONAL SEED CULTIVATION WORKSHOP II.INTERNATIONAL SEED CULTIVATION WORKSHOP KAM İ L YILMAZ -B İ SAB Tares A.Ş. Deputy Director General Industrial.
Model diagram to consider infrastructure projects in Serbia Aleksandar Kovacevic.
Plant Breeders’ Rights and National Listing Implementation and operational aspects
3 oktober 2015 Plant Breeders Rights Novi Sad, May 22.
The Changing Face of Exclusive Rights on Digital Cultural Content after the 2013 PSI Directive 3 rd LAPSI 2.0 Meeting – 10 th October 2014.
Farm saved seed in the Czech Republic Czech Republic Ing. Vojtech Dukát.
1 CHANGES TO CORPORATE INCOME TAX RULES IN THE CONTEXT OF EU INTEGRATION Sylwia Sobowiec Sławomir Boruc ( presentation prepared with the help of Baker.
The Eighth Asian Bioethics Conference Biotechnology, Culture, and Human Values in Asia and Beyond Confidentiality and Genetic data: Ethical and Legal Rights.
Session 6 : An Introduction to the TRIPS Agreement UPOV, 1978 and 1991 and WIPO- Administered Treaties.
Genetic Resources Policy and Intellectual Property I. Ownership and control of genetic resources II. Movement of genetic resources III. Intellectual Property.
Access to Genetic Resources & Traditional Knowledge The Bellagio compulsory cross-licensing proposal for benefit sharing consistent with more competition.
Licensing and Digital Exhaustion 1 Software Copyright Oren Bracha, Summer 2015.
Overview about PBR in Estonia Workshop on enforcement on Plant Variety Rights Pille Ardel Plant Production Inspectorate Head of Variety Department.
1 FRAND COMMITMENTS AND EU COMPETITION LAW Thomas Kramler European Commission, DG Competition (The views expressed are not necessarily those of the European.
E.Loop 2008 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION FOR FSS-ROYALTY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM Dr. Ernst-Adolf Loop SAATEN-UNION GmbH, Hannover Tallinn, 4 th of March 2008.
A: Copy –Rights – Artistic, Literary work, Computer software Etc. B: Related Rights – Performers, Phonogram Producers, Broadcasters etc. C: Industrial.
WARSAW May 2006 Seminar on Enforcement of Property Variety Rights.
Directive on the Authorisation of electronic communications networks & Services Directive (2002/20/EC) Authorisation Directive Presented by: Nelisa Gwele.
Data protection and compliance in context 19 November 2007 Stewart Room Partner.
CPVO Seminar11-12 May Warsaw (PL) Community rules on “Farm-saved seed”. J. GENNATAS European Commission.
Law & Policy of Relevance to the Management of Plant Genetic Resources Implementing the Treaty Session 1: Presentation 3 The International Treaty.
INITIATED BY CGN AND CTDT FUNDED BY DGIS AND OXFAMNOVIB Output of 0nline conference on Options for Farmers’ Rights 2009.
PLANT BREEDERS’ RIGHTS BILL [B11 – 2015]: Response by DAFF on the issues raised by the Parliamentary Legal Advisor 4 SEPTEMBER 2015.
TAIEX Workshop on Agricultural Advisory Services in the EU Kiev, Ukraine February 2016 Peculiarities of legal regulation of the advisory service.
Huib Ghijsen ISF. 2  Mission  PBR / PVP  Patents  Other forms of protection  IP IT-PGRFA & CBD/Nagoya Protocol Source: Crispeels, 2008.
M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 28 – Consumer and Health Protection.
M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 14 – Transport Policy Bilateral screening:
Seed industry & IPR perspective from a regional PVP Office Carlos Godinho Vice-President CPVO APSA Workshop – Bangkok, 18/05/15.
1 M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 29 – Customs union Bilateral screening:
Role of the Land Grant University in Plant Breeding and Biotechnology Randy Woodson Agricultural Research Programs Purdue University.
The need for a new seed legislation
The Protection of Confidential Commercial or Industrial Information in Environmental Law: Analysis and Call for a Graded Concept of Protection Prof. Dr.
Sophie Drogué UMR Economie Publique INRA-INAPG Istambul 9-12 may 2005
GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation)
Group Members: Tawiah Samuel: Dodou Jammeh:
THE NEW GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION: A EUROPEAN OR A GLOBAL STANDARD? Bart van der Sloot Senior Researcher Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology,
Dr. José Ignacio Cubero Marcos University of the Basque Country
WHAT IS FRANCHISING? THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE USERS
Investor protection and MIFID
Ivo Sedláček General Manager SELGEN, a.s.
OCVV Seminar Eric Devron, SICASOV Sofia the 20th September 2018.
Online conference on Options for Farmers’ Rights
Farmers’ Rights in India
TRIPS Art. 27.3(b) and Agriculture
"AL HILAL" Islamic Bank" JSC
Statutory Breeding and Technology Fee on Self-Pollinated Crops
Presentation transcript:

Udo von Kröcher 1 Enforcement of Plant Variety Rights in the Agricultural Sector in Germany Udo von Kröcher Bundessortenamt (Federal Plant Variety Office) Workshop on Enforcement of Plant Variety Rights Tallin, Estonia, 4 March 2008

Udo von Kröcher 2 Existing Plant Breeders‘ Rights under the German Plant Variety Protection Law Species Number of protected varieties Agricultural species including grapes Vegetables Fruits Ornamentals

Udo von Kröcher 3 Legal Basis UPOV Convention, Act of 1991 Art. 14 (1) Protected varieties may only be produced or reproduced, processed, offered for sale, marketed etc. with the authorisation of the breeder. The breeder may make his authorisation subject to conditions and limitations. Art. 15 (2) - Optional exemption from the breeder’s right - Contracting parties of the Convention are allowed, within reasonable limits and subject to the safeguarding of the legitimate interests of the breeder, to exempt farm saved seed from the effect of plant breeders’ rights („farmer’s privilege to use Farm Saved Seed (FSS) without the right holder’s authorisation”).

Udo von Kröcher 4 Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 Art. 13 (1, 2) Protected varieties may only be produced or reproduced, processed, offered for sale, marketed etc. with the authorisation of the breeder. The breeder may make his authorisation subject to conditions and limitations. Art. 14 (1) Farmers are authorised to use for propagating purposes in the field (on their own holding) the product of the harvest which they have obtained by planting (except hybrids and synthetic varieties). Art. 14 (2) Restricted to 22 agricultural plant species (Fodder plants, Cereals, Potatoes, Oil and Fibre Plants), which are named in the law.

Udo von Kröcher 5 Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 Art. 14 (3) Following conditions have to be obeyed - No quantitative restriction in the use of FSS - Possibility for processing the FSS - Small farmers are not charged by a fee for FSS used - Equitable remuneration which is sensibly lower than licence for CS - Monitoring by holder (breeder) - Relevant information has to be provided by farmers and processors The said criteria are implemented by Community Regulation (EC) No 1768/95.

Udo von Kröcher 6 German Plant Variety Protection Law Art. 10 (1) Protected varieties may only be produced or reproduced, processed, offered for sale, marketed etc. with the authorisation of the breeder. The breeder may make his authorisation subject to conditions and limitations. Art. 10a (2) - Farmers are authorised to use for propagating purposes in the field (on their own holding) the product of the harvest which they have obtained by planting (except hybrids and synthetic varieties) („farmer’s privilege”). - Restricted to 18 agricultural plant species (Fodder plants, Cereals, Potatoes, Oil and Fibre Plants), laid down in an Annex to the Law. Art. 10a (3) Equitable remuneration for FSS used which is sensibly lower than licence for CS.

Udo von Kröcher 7 German Plant Variety Protection Law Art. 10a (4) - Possibility of agreements between owners of variety rights and farmers as regards the equitable nature of remuneration. - Agreements may be also signed between the professional organisations of breeders and farmers. Art. 10a (5) Small farmers are not obliged to pay for FSS (threshold = 92 tons of harvested cereals/farm). Art. 10a (6) Information about the amount of FSS used has to be provided by farmers and processors.

Udo von Kröcher 8 Based on these community and national legal regulations the breeder is entitled to charge the farmer with fees/royalties - for the use of certified seeds and - for the use of Farm Saved Seed (FSS)

Udo von Kröcher 9 Only a suitable legal basis which enables the breeder to protect and safeguard his intellectual property rights will initiate further breeding progress for the benefit of the farmer. But: Enforcing their rights is in the responsibility of the breeders and breeders’ organisations because the Plant Protection Law is Private Law!

Udo von Kröcher 10 How are the described private law based regulations implemented and used by the breeders in practice in order to generate income for the refinancing of the expensive breeding of new varieties?

Udo von Kröcher 11 Royalties for certified seeds are part of the price for all certified seeds of all agricultural species purchased by the farmer, collected by the seed trader and transferred to the breeder. This system is well-established for both, varieties protected under national law and protected on the basis of Council regulation (EC) No 2100/94.

Udo von Kröcher 12 Concerning the remuneration payment (fees) for the use of FSS the German farmers have 3 options which are mainly based - on the Council Regulation (EC) No 1768/95 - the (rather general) provisions of Article 10a of the German Plant Variety Protection Law and - court case decisions

Udo von Kröcher 13 Option 1: Individual contract between the breeder and the farmer with a free arrangement concerning the level of fees Option 2: No contract between breeder and farmer but direct application of the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 1768/95 in conjunction with Article 10a of the German Law - the fee for the use of FSS shall be equitable and sensibly lower than the fee for certified seed (at least 50 % lower)

Udo von Kröcher 14 FSS remuneration fee to be paid by the farmer Change of Certified Seed FSS remuneration fee in % of royalty for Certified seed In % Cereals without Hybrid rye Pulses Potatoes testedNot tested 80, , , , , Option 3: So-called „Framework Agreement“ between the German Farmers‘ Association and the German Breeders‘ Association (2002)“ Managed by the „Saatgut-Treuhandgesellschaft (STV)“ working on behalf of the breeders.

Udo von Kröcher 15 The relevance of the use of FSS in Germany To how many varieties of which species does the question of fees for the use of FSS refer to? nationally registerednationally protected Varieties (2007) Cereals Potatoes Pulses (Field Beans, Peas, Lupins) 42 28

Udo von Kröcher 16 Acreage and the use of FSS of cereals and potatoes in Germany (2005/2006) SpeciesAcreage (ha)FSS use in % Acreage with FSS use (ha) Cerealsca ca. 50ca Potatoesca ca. 50ca

Udo von Kröcher 17 Potential total income by collecting the FSS fees: ca. 18 to 19 Mio. €/year Average FSS fee: ca. 100 €/year/farm Present total income by collecting the FSS fees: ca. 4 Mio. €/year

Udo von Kröcher 18 Increasing readiness of farmers to go to court mainly in order to appeal against the requirement to provide informations Several Court Cases - October 2001, German High Court Decision - April 2003, European Court of Justice - October 2004, European Court of Justice Main content of these judgements is that the farmers and processors have to provide information only if the breeders or his representatives have clear indications that the farmer has used or will use FSS of his protected variety.

Udo von Kröcher 19 -Increasing resistance of farmers against providing the requested information -Constantly decreasing payments of FSS fees

Udo von Kröcher 20 What can, what has to be done? -analysis of present national legislation in the light of the present judgements -comparison with other national legal provisions -legal amendments on national and community level -analysis of the private agreements

Udo von Kröcher 21 -analysis of the concerns and the reasons for resistance of farmers to pay -new common activities between farmers‘ and breeders‘ associations are necessary in order to better inform the FSS users about their share of responsibility for the breeding progress