One of the excuses used by Germany’s Federal Court of Justice in the VoiceAgeEVS v. HMD  case to justify an injunction was its finding that injunctions are necessary to encourage implementers to take a license.  But SEP licensing   is not a goal of standard development .   Let me say that again – SEP licensing is not a goal of standard development.   SEP licensing by those who participate in the development of a standard is tolerated only because it is believed to support one

The European Commission (“EC”) Study focused on European Courts’ “inconsistency” in the application of the Directive on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (“IPRED”) and advocated a “wait and see” “soft law” approach to solving the problem.  See, "Inconsistency" - Europe Dithers Some More ).  But, this “inconsistency” is not a failure to understand how to apply the IPRED properly but a willful refusal to follow it based on German and German-influenced Unified Pate

You can find my first post on the “Follow-up study on the application of the Directive on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” (“ EC Study ”) here: "Inconsistency" - Europe Dithers Some More .  I wanted to take another look at the EC Study since there is so much to unpack in its 132 pages (not to mention the multiple attachments).  This post focuses on patent assertion entities (PAEs) and their relationship to other identified problems.  The EC Study defines PAEs