Kontraktsbrott eller intrång?
(2024) JURM02 20241Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- A distinctive feature of a licence agreement is that the subject matter of the licence typically is the exclusive right granted to the licensor by intellectual property law. In the event of a dispute between the licensor and the licensee, the intangible nature of the subject matter of the licence may make it difficult to determine whether a licensee's breach of the licence agreement constitutes a breach of contract or an infringement. An infringement claim is not based on contractual grounds, but on intellectual property law.
In other words, a breach of the licence agreement may give rise to a dual legal track between the licensor and the licensee – the law of the parties, which is the agreement, and intellectual property law. This... (More) - A distinctive feature of a licence agreement is that the subject matter of the licence typically is the exclusive right granted to the licensor by intellectual property law. In the event of a dispute between the licensor and the licensee, the intangible nature of the subject matter of the licence may make it difficult to determine whether a licensee's breach of the licence agreement constitutes a breach of contract or an infringement. An infringement claim is not based on contractual grounds, but on intellectual property law.
In other words, a breach of the licence agreement may give rise to a dual legal track between the licensor and the licensee – the law of the parties, which is the agreement, and intellectual property law. This circumstance raises questions at the intersection of intellectual property law and civil procedure. The purpose of this paper is to examine this intersection, by investigating how the issue of concurrent liability, jurisdiction and arbitration clauses affect the licensor's ability to bring an action against the licensee in the event of the licensee's breach of the licence agreement.
The results of the study show that the licensor's ability to choose between an action based on either contract or intellectual property law is not the same for the different intellectual property rights addressed in the paper. In trademark law, the choice of the licensor in the event of concurrent claims is regulated by law. In the case of other intellectual property rights – design, patent, and copyright – there is no legislative regulation on the matter. However, doctrine suggests that the licensor may have a choice in the event of concurrent liability if the breach in question relates to important features of the intellectual property right. When the licensee's breach of the licence agreement constitutes an infringement of the licensor's exclusive right, case law establishes that the licensor should have an option to resort to legal remedies in intellectual property law.
If the licensor chooses to invoke alternative claims against the licensee – one on a contractual basis and one a non-contractual basis – the study shows that the exclusive jurisdiction of the Patent and Market Court does not necessarily prevent an infringement action from being joined with a contractual dispute. The Patent and Market Court may hear both grounds of the licensor's action, if appropriate under the circumstances.
The paper concludes by addressing the question of whether an arbitration clause in a licence agreement can constitute an obstacle to the licensor's non-contractual claim in a general court. The study shows that an arbitration clause is unlikely to cover the licensor's non-contractual claims. However, in rare cases, there is a risk that the application of the doctrine of connection will bring a non-contractual claim within the scope of an arbitration clause. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Utmärkande för ett licensavtal är att licensobjektet i regel är den ensamrätt som tillkommer licensgivaren enligt immaterialrättslagstiftningen. Vid en eventuell tvist mellan licensgivaren och licenstagaren kan licensobjektets immateriella karaktär göra det svårt att avgöra om en licenstagares överträdelse av licensavtalet utgör ett kontraktsbrott eller ett intrång. En talan om intrång vilar inte på kontraktsrättslig grund enligt licensavtalet, utan aktualiserar de utomobligatoriska immaterialrättsliga reglerna.
Licenstagarens överträdelse av licensavtalet kan med andra ord aktualisera ett dubbelt rättsligt spår mellan licensgivaren och licenstagaren – parternas lag i form av avtalet och den immaterialrättsliga lagstiftningen. Denna... (More) - Utmärkande för ett licensavtal är att licensobjektet i regel är den ensamrätt som tillkommer licensgivaren enligt immaterialrättslagstiftningen. Vid en eventuell tvist mellan licensgivaren och licenstagaren kan licensobjektets immateriella karaktär göra det svårt att avgöra om en licenstagares överträdelse av licensavtalet utgör ett kontraktsbrott eller ett intrång. En talan om intrång vilar inte på kontraktsrättslig grund enligt licensavtalet, utan aktualiserar de utomobligatoriska immaterialrättsliga reglerna.
Licenstagarens överträdelse av licensavtalet kan med andra ord aktualisera ett dubbelt rättsligt spår mellan licensgivaren och licenstagaren – parternas lag i form av avtalet och den immaterialrättsliga lagstiftningen. Denna omständighet väcker frågor inom skärningspunkten mellan immaterialrätten och civilprocessrätten. Syftet med uppsatsen är att undersöka denna skärningspunkt, genom att utreda hur frågan om konkurrerande ansvarsgrunder, domstolsbehörighet samt skiljeklausuler påverkar licensgivarens möjlighet att föra en talan mot licenstagaren vid licenstagarens överträdelse av licensavtalet.
Resultatet av undersökningen visar att licensgivarens möjlighet att välja mellan en inomobligatorisk talan på kontraktsrättslig grund enligt licensavtalet och en utomobligatorisk intrångstalan inte är densamma för de skilda immaterialrätter som behandlas i uppsatsen. Inom varumärkesrätten är licensgivarens valmöjlighet vid anspråkskonkurrens lagreglerad. I fråga om övriga immateriella rättigheter – mönster, patent och upphovsrätt – saknas en lagreglering i frågan. I doktrin framkommer att en valmöjlighet vid anspråkskonkurrens bör finnas, om licenstagaren överträder villkor i licensavtalet som hänför sig till viktiga inslag i den immateriella ensamrätten. Om licenstagarens överträdelse av licensavtalet utgör ett intrång i licensgivarens ensamrätt, fastslås i praxis att licensgivaren ska ha en möjlighet att tillgripa immaterialrättsliga sanktioner.
Om licensgivaren väljer att åberopa alternativa grunder för sitt anspråk mot licenstagaren – ett på inomobligatorisk grund och ett på utomobligatorisk grund – visar undersökningen att Patent- och marknadsdomstolens exklusiva behörighet inte nödvändigtvis utgör ett hinder mot att en intrångstalan kumuleras med en avtalstvist. Patent- och marknadsdomstolen kan pröva båda grunder för licensgivarens talan, om det med hänsyn till omständigheterna framstår som lämpligt.
I uppsatsen behandlas avslutningsvis frågan om en skiljeklausul i ett licensavtal kan utgöra ett hinder mot licensgivarens utomobligatoriska talan i allmän domstol. Undersökningen visar att en skiljeklausul troligtvis inte omfattar licensgivarens utomobligatoriska talan. I undantagsfall finns det dock en risk att en tillämpning av anknytningsdoktrinen medför att en utomobligatorisk talan omfattas av en skiljeklausul. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9152867
- author
- Altundal, Rojken LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Breach of contract or infringement?
- course
- JURM02 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- immaterialrätt, förmögenhetsrätt, civilrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9152867
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-07 10:34:25
- date last changed
- 2024-06-07 10:34:25
@misc{9152867,
abstract = {{A distinctive feature of a licence agreement is that the subject matter of the licence typically is the exclusive right granted to the licensor by intellectual property law. In the event of a dispute between the licensor and the licensee, the intangible nature of the subject matter of the licence may make it difficult to determine whether a licensee's breach of the licence agreement constitutes a breach of contract or an infringement. An infringement claim is not based on contractual grounds, but on intellectual property law.
In other words, a breach of the licence agreement may give rise to a dual legal track between the licensor and the licensee – the law of the parties, which is the agreement, and intellectual property law. This circumstance raises questions at the intersection of intellectual property law and civil procedure. The purpose of this paper is to examine this intersection, by investigating how the issue of concurrent liability, jurisdiction and arbitration clauses affect the licensor's ability to bring an action against the licensee in the event of the licensee's breach of the licence agreement.
The results of the study show that the licensor's ability to choose between an action based on either contract or intellectual property law is not the same for the different intellectual property rights addressed in the paper. In trademark law, the choice of the licensor in the event of concurrent claims is regulated by law. In the case of other intellectual property rights – design, patent, and copyright – there is no legislative regulation on the matter. However, doctrine suggests that the licensor may have a choice in the event of concurrent liability if the breach in question relates to important features of the intellectual property right. When the licensee's breach of the licence agreement constitutes an infringement of the licensor's exclusive right, case law establishes that the licensor should have an option to resort to legal remedies in intellectual property law.
If the licensor chooses to invoke alternative claims against the licensee – one on a contractual basis and one a non-contractual basis – the study shows that the exclusive jurisdiction of the Patent and Market Court does not necessarily prevent an infringement action from being joined with a contractual dispute. The Patent and Market Court may hear both grounds of the licensor's action, if appropriate under the circumstances.
The paper concludes by addressing the question of whether an arbitration clause in a licence agreement can constitute an obstacle to the licensor's non-contractual claim in a general court. The study shows that an arbitration clause is unlikely to cover the licensor's non-contractual claims. However, in rare cases, there is a risk that the application of the doctrine of connection will bring a non-contractual claim within the scope of an arbitration clause.}},
author = {{Altundal, Rojken}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Kontraktsbrott eller intrång?}},
year = {{2024}},
}