WORLD TRADE IP/N/6/DEU/1
1May1997
ORGANIZATION(97-1900)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
CHECKLIST OFISSUES ONENFORCEMENT1
Responses from Germany
Preliminary Remarks
Thefollowing statutes ensure specific protection ofintellectual property rights:
- Patent Law(Patentgesetz)
- Utility Model Law(Gebrauchsmustergesetz)
- LawontheProtection oftheTopographies ofMicroelectronic Semiconductor Products
-Semiconductor Protection Law(Gesetz über denSchutz derTopographien von
mikroelektronischen Halbleitererzeugnissen -HalbleiterschutzG)
- LawontheProtection ofPlantVarieties -Varieties Protection Law(Sortenschutzgesetz
-SortenschutzG)
- LawontheProtection ofTrade Marks andother Signs -Trade Mark Law(Gesetz
überdenSchutz vonMarken undsonstigen Kennzeichen -Markengesetz)
- Lawconcerning Copyright inIndustrial Designs -Designs Law(Gesetz betreffend
dasUrheberrecht anMustern undModellen -Geschmacksmustergesetz)
- LawonCopyrightandNeighbouringRights-CopyrightLaw(GesetzüberUrheberrecht
undverwandte Schutzrechte -Urheberrechtsgesetz)
Thefollowing statutes arealsorelevant tothegeneral questions ofimplementation ofthelaw:
- Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch -BGB)
- Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch -StGB)
- Courts Constitution Act(Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz -GVG)
- Code ofCivil Procedure (Zivilprozeßordnung -ZPO)
- Code ofCriminal Procedure (Strafprozeßordnung -StPO)
- Court Costs Act(Gerichtskostengesetz -GKG)
- Federal Code ofLawyers 'Fees(Bundesgebührenordnung fürRechtsanwälte -BRAGO)
1Document IP/C/5IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page2
Civil andAdministrative Procedures andRemedies
(a) Civiljudicial procedures andremedies
1. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overIPRinfringement cases.
Inaccordance withtherelevant statutes (with theexception oftheCopyright Law) thecivil
chambers oftheRegional Courts (Landgericht) haveexclusive jurisdiction forlitigation regarding
intellectual property rights, regardless ofthevalue indispute (section 143subsection 1ofthePatent
Law, section 27subsection 1oftheUtility Model Law, section 11subsection 2oftheSemiconductor
Products Protection Actinconjunction withsection 27subsection 1oftheUtility Model Law,section 38
subsection 1oftheVarieties Protection Law,section 15subsection 1oftheDesigns Lawandsection 140
subsection 1oftheTrade Mark Law). TheLänder governments areempowered byvirtue ofthese
statutes toconcentrate suchlitigation withoneRegional Court bymeans ofalegalordinance (section 143
subsection 2ofthePatent Law,section 27subsection 2oftheUtility Model Law,section 11subsection 2
oftheSemiconductor Protection Lawinconjunction withsection 27subsection 2oftheUtility Model
Law, section 38subsection 2oftheVarieties Protection Law, section 15subsection 2oftheDesigns
Lawandsection 140subsection 2oftheTrade Mark Law). Most oftheLänder havedonethis.
Copyright litigation maybecarried outbefore thecourts ofordinary jurisdiction (section 104
firstsentenceoftheCopyrightLaw).JurisdictionthenbelongswitheithertheLocalCourts(Amtsgericht)
ortheRegional Courts -depending onthevalue indispute- (section 23subsection 1andsection 71
oftheCourts Constitution Act). Forcopyright litigation arising outofemployment orservice
relationships thatconcern solely claims tothepayment ofanagreed remuneration, recourse maybe
hadtotheLabour Courts (Arbeitsgericht) ortotheAdministrative Courts (Verwaltungsgeright)
(section 104second sentence oftheCopyright Law). TheLänder governments maybymeans ofa
legal ordinance concentrate withoneLocal Court copyright litigation falling within thejurisdiction
oftheLocal Courts. Thesameapplies tolitigation falling within thejurisdiction oftheRegional Courts
(section 105subsections 1and2oftheCopyright Law). Most oftheLänder havedonethis.
2. Which persons havestanding toassert IPRs? How maytheyberepresented? Arethere
requirements formandatory personal appearances before thecourt bytheright holder?
Anyone claiming toholdaright, orclaiming tobethelegal successor oftheoriginal right
holder, mayassert thisrightincourt.
Before Regional Courts andhigher courts, theparties mustberepresented byalawyer acting
astheir counsel whoisadmitted bythetrialcourt (section 78subsection 1oftheCode ofCivil
Procedure).Ifjurisdictionhasbeenconcentrated,(cf.at1),lawyersmayalsorepresentwhoareadmitted
totheRegional Court within whose jurisdiction theaction would fallwithout thisconcentration
(section 143subsection 3ofthePatent Law,section 27subsection 3oftheUtility Model Law,section 11
subsection 2oftheSemiconductor Protection Lawinconjunction withthesection 27subsection 3of
theUtility Model Law,section 38subsection 3oftheVarieties Protection Law,section 140subsection 3
oftheTrade Mark Law, section 15subsection 3oftheDesigns Lawandsection 104subsection 4of
theCopyright Law). Ifthelitigation isunder thejurisdiction oftheLocal Court (which isonlypossible
incopyright litigation cf.at1),inaccordance withsection 79oftheCode ofCivilProcedure theparties
maycarry outtheproceedings themselves orviaanyperson having thecapacity toconduct proceedings
(cf.sections 51-55 oftheCode ofCivil Procedure onthismatter). Patent lawyers mayalsoact.
Onprinciple, theparties arenotobligated toappear inperson before thecourt. Inaccordance
withsection 141subsection 1firstsentence andsection 273subsection 2No.3oftheCode ofCivil
Procedure, thecourt mayhowever order theparties toappear inperson ifthisisnecessary inorderIP/N/6/DEU/1
Page3
toclarify thefactsofthecase. Thisdoesnotapply ifaparty cannot beexpected toattend thehearing
inperson because ofagreatdistance orforanother important reason (section 141subsection 1second
sentence oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
3. What authority dothejudicial authorities have toorder, attherequest ofanopposing
party, aparty toaproceeding toproduce evidence which lieswithin itscontrol?
Ifanintellectualpropertyrighthasbeenviolated,theinjuredpartymaydemandfromtheinjuring
party information relating totheorigin anddistribution channels ofitems constituting theviolation
oftheright. Therighttoinformation covers: information astothemanufacturer 'sname andaddress,
thesupplier andother previous owners oftheitems, thecommercial purchaser orclient, aswellas
theamount ofitems which havebeenmanufactured, delivered, received orordered (section 140b
subsections 1and2ofthePatent Law, section 37bsubsections 1and2oftheVarieties Protection Law,
section 24bsubsections 1and2oftheUtility Model Law, section 9subsection 2inconjunction with
section 24boftheUtility Model Law, section 19subsections 1and2oftheTrade Mark Law,section 14a
oftheDesigns Lawinconjunction withsection 101aoftheCopyright Lawandsection 101asubsections
1and2oftheCopyright Law). These rights toinformation maybeasserted either viaaseparate action
or-ifthespecial preconditions aremet(cf.below at12.)- bymeans ofaprovisional disposition in
accordance withsections 935and940oftheCode ofCivil Procedure.
Section 809oftheCivil Code grants arighttohaveanitemsubmitted ortoinspect itifthe
rightholder hasorsupposes tohaveaclaim "inrespect oftheitem". Such rights mayemerge from
intellectual property rights. Inaccordance withalineofrulings oftheFederal Court ofJustice (BGHZ
93,191=GRUR 1985, 512), thisisconditional ontheperson whoasserts theclaim demonstrating
thattheitemveryprobably constitutes aviolation ofaright. Therequired inspection maytherefore
onlyserve tocreate afinal, clearpicture oftheviolation. Inaccordance withalineofrulings bythe
Federal Court ofJustice "inspection" isonlypermissible withregard toinvestigation methods which
maybeusedwithout encroaching onthesubstance oftheitemwhich istobeinvestigated. Theright
toinspect maybeasserted bymeans ofaseparate action or-iftheother preconditions aremet(cf.
below at12.)- bymeans ofaprovisional disposition inaccordance withsections 935and940ofthe
Code ofCivil Procedure.
Inthecontext ofpending civilproceedings, firstly thedistribution oftheburden ofproof is
tobeadhered to.Theparty which isnotunder thisburden onprinciple doesnotneedtoprovide any
evidence onitsowninitiative. There arehowever several exceptions tothisprinciple:
- Attherequest oftheparty under theburden ofproof, thecourt mayorder thatthe
other party submit documents which areinitspossession ifthelatter hadpreviously
referred tothem inthecourse ofoffering evidence, even ifthatoccurred ina
preparatory brief(section 423oftheCode ofCivil Procedure). Thesame applies if
theparty which isunder theburden ofproof isentitled todemand therelinquishment
ortheproduction ofthedocuments fromtheopposing partyunder civillaw(section 422
oftheCode ofCivil Procedure). Themost important basis foraclaim under civil
lawintheareaofintellectual rights iscontained insection 810oftheCivil Code.
Thisnorm affords arighttoinspect adocument ifitwascreated intheinterest ofthe
person asserting theclaim, ifitcertifies theexistence ofalegalrelationship between
himandanother, orifitrecords negotiations relating toalegaltransaction inwhich
theperson asserting theclaim wasinvolved either directly orviaanagent. Ifthe
opposing party refuses tosubmit thedocument although heorsheisobligated todo
so,inaccordance withsection 427oftheCode ofCivilProcedure thecourt mayregardIP/N/6/DEU/1
Page4
thesubmission oftheparty under theburden ofproof withregard tothenature and
content ofthedocument asproven.
- Attherequest oftheparty under theburden ofproof orexofficio ,thecourt mayorder
theopposing party tobequestioned (sections 445and448oftheCode ofCivil
Procedure). Ifthelatter refuses tomake astatement, thecourt mayreach itsown
conclusions withregard tothiscircumstance, andwhere appropriate mayalsoregard
therejected factasproven (sections 446and453oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
- Andfinally, thelineofrulings hasextracted from theprinciple ofgood faithaduty
incumbent ontheparty notunder theburden ofproof toprovide information in
individual cases (section 242oftheCivil Code). Thishasconcerned cases where the
party which wasactually under theburden ofproof wasunclear forcomprehensible
reasons astotheexistence andtheextent ofitsright, whilst theopposing party was
easily abletoprovide more details. Thisishowever conditional onalegalrelationship
exiting between theparties which mayalsobeestablished bymeans ofaviolation of
aright. Persons seeking information mustalsoatleastplausibly demonstrate thata
righthasbeenviolated.
4. What means exist toidentify andprotect confidential information brought forward as
evidence?
Section 383subsection 1No.6oftheCode ofCivil Procedure grants tosuchpersons aright
torefuse totestify, "towhom matters areentrusted byvirtue oftheiroffice, profession ortradewhich
aretobekeptsecret duetotheirnature orbylaw"suchaslawyers andpatent lawyers, auditors and
auditors ofannual accounts, aswellasbanks.
Inaccordance withsection 384oftheCode ofCivil Procedure arighttorefuse totestify also
exists withregard toquestions, "which thewitness would notbeabletoanswer without revealing an
artistic orcommercial secret".
Theparties themselves arenotexempted from theirrespective duties togoforward withthe
evidence. Theinterest oftheparty notunder theburden ofproof tomaintain itsbusiness orcompany
secrets however limits theestablishment ofduties toprovide information ortocooperate: unless the
interestininformationevidentlytakesprecedence,thepartynotundertheburdenofproofisnotobligated
toreveal itsownsecrets. Thiscanbededuced fromsection 446oftheCode ofCivil Procedure which
specifically concerns thequestioning oftheparty. Thisprinciple however alsoapplies totheduties
tocooperate deduced from good faith(section 242oftheCivil Code) andtoright ofinformation
contained insection 809oftheCivil Code.
Furthermore, inaccordance withsection 172No.2oftheCourts Constitution Actthecourt
mayholdtheentire proceedings orapartofthemincamera, if"animportant secret isdiscussed relating
tobusiness, acompany, aninvention ortofiscal matters thepublic discussion ofwhich would violate
priority interests which areworthy ofprotection". Inaccordance withsection 174subsection 3of
theCourts Constitution Actthecourtmayalsoobligate thepersons remaining atthesession, inparticular
theparties andtheircounsel, tokeepsecret factsofwhich theylearn intheproceedings.
Inorder tocomply asclosely aspossible bothwiththeinterest ofsecrecy andofclarification,
thecourt mayorder thatanarticle oradocument maynotbeexamined before thecourt inthepresence
oftheparties, butbyaneutral person whohasbeensworn tosecrecy, suchasanauditor. Thelatter
isgiven aprecisely defined commission toinvestigate, onwhich heisthentoreport before thecourt.IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page5
5. Describetheremediesthatmaybeorderedbythejudicialauthoritiesandcriteria,legislative
orjurisprudential, fortheir use:
- injunctions
Injunctivereliefisaffordedbysection139subsection1ofthePatentLaw,section24subsection1
oftheUtility Model Law, section 9subsection 1firstsentence oftheSemiconductor Protection Law,
section 37subsection 1oftheVarieties Protection Law, section 14subsection 5oftheTrade Mark
Law, section 14asubsection 1oftheDesigns Lawandsection 97subsection 1oftheCopyright Law.
Injunctive relief mayalready beasserted bytheright holder eveniftheviolation hasnotyetbeen
committed, butconcrete factsgiverisetothefearthataviolation might becommitted inthefuture
("preventive injunctive relief"). Iftheviolation hasalready beencommitted, relief isconditional on
thedanger existing thattheactwillberepeated. Asarule,however, thisisalready evident fromthe
previous violation.
Section 14asubsection 1oftheDesigns Lawandsection 97subsection 1oftheCopyright Law
afford totheinjured party aright tohavetheviolation removed. Inaccordance withsection 14a
subsection 3oftheDesigns Lawandwithsection 101subsection 1oftheCopyright Law, aperson
committing suchaviolation without guiltmayinstead indemnify inmoney theinjured partyifremoving
theviolation innature would bedisproportionately detrimental tohim,andifontheother handthe
injured party mayreasonably berequired toaccept redress incash.
- damages, including recovery ofprofits, andexpenses, including attorney 'sfees
Damages canbeclaimed according tosection 139subsection 2ofthePatent Law, section 24
subsection 2oftheUtility Model Law, section 9subsection 1second sentence oftheSemiconductor
Protection Law, section 37subsection 2oftheVarieties Protection Law, section 14subsection 6of
theTrade Mark Law, section 14asubsection 1oftheDesigns Lawandsection 97subsection 1ofthe
Copyright Law. Damages arealways conditional ontheinjuring party having acted intentionally or
negligently. Inaccordance withsection 249oftheCivil Code, damages areintended tobring about
restoration oftheprevious condition and,inaccordance withsection 251oftheCivilCode, aremostly
tobemade intheformofmoney. Theinjured party maycalculate thedamage doneinthree different
ways:
(i) bydemonstrating theconcrete lossofassets incurred because oftheviolation ofthe
right. Inaccordance withtheprinciple contained insection 252oftheCivil Code,
thisalsoincludes lossofprofit;
(ii) byrequiring payment ofareasonable licence feeasthecustomary remuneration for
theuseoftherightwhich hasbeenviolated; or
(iii) bydemanding theprofit gained bytheinjuring party from theviolation oftheright.
Thisisexpressly mentioned onlyinsection 14asubsection 1second sentence ofthe
Designs Lawandsection 97subsection 1oftheCopyright Law, butishowever
recognised inrelation toallintellectual property rights.
Thecostofconsultingalawyerorpatentlawyerpriortotheproceedingscanalsobecompensated
for,unless thesecostsaremetinthecontext ofreimbursal ofthecostsoftheproceedings inaccordance
withsections 91etseqq. oftheCode ofCivil Procedure (cf.below at8.).
Incases where theinjuring party canonlybeaccused ofslight negligence, section 139
subsection 2second sentence ofthePatent Law, section 24subsection 2second sentence oftheUtilityIP/N/6/DEU/1
Page6
Model Law, section 9subsection 1second sentence oftheSemiconductor Protection Law, section 37
subsection 2second sentence oftheVarieties Protection Lawandsection 14asubsection 1thirdsentence
oftheDesigns Lawmake itpossible forthecourt, atitsdiscretion andtaking intoaccount allthe
circumstances oftheindividual case, todetermine, instead ofdamages, compensation theamount of
which islessthanthefullextent ofthedamages, butwhich however must beatleastashighasthe
benefit obtained bytheinjuring party bymeans oftheviolation oftheright.
Without proof ofguilt, theinjured party maydemand from theinjuring party thesurrender
ofthebenefit obtained from theviolation oftheright inaccordance withtheprinciples ofunjust
enrichment (sections 812etseqq. oftheCivilCode). Asarule,thebenefit conferred upontheviolator
istheuseoftherightforwhich heorshewould otherwise havehadtopay.Insuchcases, themarket
value ofsuchuseistobereimbursed. Incontrast, theperson violating therightmay, inaccordance
withsection 818subsection 3oftheCivil Code, attempt toprove thatheorsheisnolonger enriched.
- destruction orother disposal ofinfringing goods andmaterials/implements for
their production
Theinjured party maydemand thattheitems themselves which violate theright, aswellas
equipment usedtoviolate theright, bedestroyed. Thisright doesnotexistifthecondition ofthe
equipment caused bytheviolation oftherightcanbeaverted byother means, oriftheinjuring party
cannot beexpected todestroy theequipment inanindividual case(section 140a ofthePatent Law,
section 24aoftheUtility Model Law, section 9subsection 2oftheSemiconductor Protection Law
inconjuntion withsection 24aoftheUtility Model Law, section 37aoftheVarieties Protection Law,
section 18oftheTrade Mark Law, section 14asubsection 3oftheDesigns Lawinconjunction with
sections 98-101 oftheCopyright Law, aswellassections 98and99oftheCopyright Law). Particular
rights tohavecomputer programs destroyed arealsoafforded bysections 69cand69foftheCopyright
Law.
- anyother remedies
Inaccordance withsection 103oftheCopyright Law, alsoreferred toinsection 14subsection 3
oftheDesigns Law, theinjured party whohaswoninthedamages proceedings maybeafforded
permission tohavethejudgment published attheexpense ofthelosing party.
6. Inwhat circumstances, ifany, dojudicial authorities have theauthority toorder the
infringer toinform theright holder oftheidentity ofthird persons involved intheproduction
anddistribution ofthegoods orservices found tobeinfringing andoftheirchannels ofdistribution?
Therelevant statutes (section 140b ofthePatent Law, section 24boftheUtility Model Law,
section 9subsection 2inconjunction withsection 24boftheUtility Model Law, section 37bofthe
Varieties Protection Law, section 19oftheTrade Mark Lawandsection 14subsection 3oftheDesigns
Lawinconjunction withsection 101a oftheCopyright Law) afford theinjured party theright to
information regarding theorigin andthedistribution channels ofthearticles which infringe hisrights
against anyone utilising theright without hisconsent. Thiscovers information regarding thename
andaddress ofthemanufacturer, thesupplier andother previous owners, thecommercial purchaser
orclient, aswellasonthequantity ofobjects violating theright. Theclaim onlyceases toexistif
itsimplementation would bedisproportionate inindividual cases.IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page7
7. Describe provisions relating totheindemnification ofdefendants wrongfully enjoined.
Towhat extent arepublic authorities and/or officials liable insuchasituation andwhat "remedial
measures" areapplicable tothem?
Aslongasajudgment hasnotgained afinalbinding effect (section 705oftheCode ofCivil
Procedure, "Rechtskraft"), thewinning partyexecutes itatitsownrisk.Inaccordance withsection 717
subsection 2oftheCode ofCivil Procedure, heorsheistocompensate foranydamage donetothe
other party byexecution ofajudgement which hasbeen declared provisionally executable ifthis
judgement isrescinded oramended. Forthisreason, inaccordance withsection 709oftheCode of
CivilProcedure, onprinciple judgements which havenotyetgained afinalbinding effect ("Rechtskraft")
aredeclared provisionally executable onlyupon payment ofasecurity which isintended toensure
payment ofanyclaim fordamages under section 717subsection 2oftheCode ofCivil Procedure.
Even ifaparty hasobtained aprovisional disposition against theother inaccordance with
section 935or940oftheCode ofCivil Procedure, heorsheisobligated topaycompensation ifthe
provisional disposition reveals itselfashaving beenunjustified fromtheoutset (section 945oftheCode
ofCivil Procedure).
Anyone whohasanincorrect judgement oranother executory title-such asaprovisional
disposition- executed eventhough theyareaware offactsgiving risetotheincorrectness ofthetitle,
maybeobligated bytheother party topaycompensation under section 826oftheCivil Code iftheir
conduct istoberegarded asunethical, ifforinstance theyhaveintentionally obtained anincorrect
executory title.
Inaccordance withsection 839subsection 2oftheCivil Code, judges areliable fordamage
caused byincorrect judgements onlyincases where theirbreach ofdutyconstitutes acriminal offence
-suchasincasesof(intentional) perversion ofjustice (section 336oftheCriminal Code). Inaccordance
withsection 839subsection 1oftheCivil Code theyareliable fordamage donetothelosing party
byanincorrect provisional disposition onlyiftheyhaveintentionally ornegligently acted inbreach
ofanofficial dutyincumbent onthemwithregard tothespecific party encumbered bytheprovisional
disposition. Inaccordance withsection 839subsection 3oftheCivil Code, thedutytoprovide
compensation doesnothowever apply iftheinjured party hasintentionally ornegligently omitted to
avert thedamage byfiling anappeal.
Inaccordance withsection 839oftheCivil Code inconjunction withArticle 34oftheBasic
Law, thestateisliable forintentional ornegligent breaches ofofficial duties byofficials inrespect
ofthirdparties.
8. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
There arenoprovisions governing theminimum required ormaximum permissible duration
andcostofproceedings. Thecourts areindependent andarenotbound byastricttimeframe. However,
there isaseries ofprovisions intheCode ofCivil Procedure aimed atexpediting civilproceedings
inverygeneral terms. Thisincludes forinstance provisions specifying thatlitigation should bedealt
withassoonaspossible andatasingle session, which istobecomprehensively prepared (sections 272
etseqq. oftheCode ofCivil Procedure), orwhich instruct theparties tomake adeclaration asearly
aspossible (sections 282and519oftheCode ofCivil Procedure), andwhich make itpossible for
thecourt todisregard latesubmissions (sections 296and527etseqq.oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
Inaccordance withsection 95oftheCode ofCivil Procedure, aparty whose conduct delays the
proceedings istobearthecosts caused bythedelay.IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page8
Proceedings aimed attheissuance ofaprovisional disposition inaccordance withsections 935
and940oftheCode ofCivil Procedure aremuch quicker since theapplicant doesnotneedtoprove
hisorherallegations, butsimply to"credibly establish" them (section 936inconjunction with920
subsection 2and294subsection 1oftheCode ofCivilProcedure) andbecause onlyevidence presented
tothecourt isadmitted (section 294subsection 2oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
Court costs, alsoincluding those ofthetaking ofevidence, aredetermined incivilproceedings
inaccordance withthevalue indispute, andarelaiddown bylawintheCourt Costs Act(GKG).
Thisapplies onprinciple alsotolawyers 'feeswhich -depending onthevalue indispute- areregulated
bytheFederal Code ofLawyers 'Fees. Theparties mayagree inwriting onhigher lawyers 'fees.
Some oftherelevant statutes provide forthecourt being abletoorder, inresponse toan
application, thatthefeesareonlytobecalculated inaccordance withapartofthevalue indispute
ifapartymakes aplausible casethattheburden ofthecostsoftheproceedings would poseaconsiderable
danger totheireconomic position weretheytobecalculated inaccordance withthefullvalue indispute
(section 144ofthePatent Law, section 26oftheUtility Model Law, section 11subsection 2ofthe
Semiconductor Products Protection Actinconjunction withsection 26oftheUtility Model Lawand
section 142oftheTrade Mark Law).
Thelosing partybears thecostsofthewinning party(section 91oftheCode ofCivilProcedure).
Thisincludes notonlylawyers 'feesuptothelevellaiddown bylawintheFederal Code ofLawyers '
Fees, but-with theexception ofcopyright litigation- alsothecosts ofapatent lawyer (section 143
subsection 5ofthePatent Law,section 27subsection 5oftheUtility Model Law, section 38subsection 4
oftheVarieties Protection Law, section 140subsection 5oftheTrade Mark Lawandsection 15
subsection 5oftheDesigns Law). Ifonlypartial success isachieved intheproceedings, allofthe
costs oftheproceedings (including thenecessary lawyers 'feesincurred bybothparties) aredivided
between theparties (section 92oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
Atpresent,therearenoup-to-datedataregardingthedurationandcostofproceedingsconcerning
violations ofintellectual property rights. Older studies existonlyintheareas ofproceedings relating
toviolations oftrademarks andtolitigation onpatents andutility models.
Astudy undertaken bytheMaxPlanck Institute forForeign andInternational Private Law
onproceedings related toviolation oftrademarks (Eva-Marina Bastian, Horst-Peter Götting, Roland
Knaak, Dieter Stauder: DerMarkenverletzungsprozeß inausgewählten Ländern derEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft [Proceedings Related toViolation ofTrademarks inSelected States ofthe
European Economic Community], 1993) isbased onstudies of985setsofproceedings intrademark
litigation which werestarted in1983and1984. Thevalue indispute oftheseproceedings wasbetween
DM5,000 andDM6.3million, averaging around DM220,600. Average costs forprovisional
disposition proceedings were DM4,920, forproceedings inthemain action DM6,380.
539(= 54.7%) ofthecases which were studied were dealt withasproceedings forafinal
judgment ("Hauptsacheverfahren"). Iftheywere concluded atfirstinstance, theytookonaverage
5.25months (163days). Iftheproceedings wenttosecond instance, theaverage grew toabout one
yearandfivemonth (513days). Ifaparty filedanappeal onpoints oflawonly, theentire proceedings
tookanaverage ofthreeyears andeleven months (1,416 days). Ofthe485setsofproceedings which
were carried outontheirmerits, only110wenttothestage ofappeal onpoints offactandlaw,of
which only16reached theFederal Court ofJustice asappeals onpoints oflawonly.
446setsofproceedings (=45.3%)were foraprovisional disposition. Onaverage, an
enforceable ruling wasissued afterthree days, andajudgement atfirstinstance afteratotalofaboutIP/N/6/DEU/1
Page9
21/2months. Iftheproceedings thenwenttosecond instance, thetotalduration grew tobetween
6and8months.
Forproceedings relating toviolations ofpatents andutility models, there exists onlyastudy
ofcases which werebegun in1972-1974 (Dieter Stauder: Patent -undGebrauchsmusterverletzungs-
verfahren inderBundesrepublik Deutschland, Großbritannien, Frankreich undItalien [Proceedings
relating toViolations ofPatent andUtility Models intheFederal Republic ofGermany, Great Britain,
France andItaly], 1989). Thisstudy isnowoutofdate. Patent infringement proceedings usually take
slightly longer thanproceedings related totheviolation oftrademarks. Itcanbeestimated thatthe
proceedings inthefirstinstance usually takeabout 1-2years. Ifanexpert opinion isnecessary they
maylastbetween 2and4years.
(b) Administrative procedures andremedies
9. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative procedures onthemerits
andremedies thatmayresult from these procedures.
Proceedings relating toviolation ofanintellectual property right arenotcarried outas
administrative proceedings, unless itisaquestion ofseizing ataborder items which violate rights (cf.
15.-19. below).
Provisional Measures
(a) Judicial measures
10. Describe thetypes ofprovisional measures thatjudicial authorities mayorder, andthe
legal basis forsuchauthority.
Ashasalready beenstated above, alltherelevant statutes afford a"preventive" righttoomission
eveniftheviolation oftherighthasnotyetbeencommitted, buthowever specific factsindicate the
danger ofafuture violation (section 139subsection 1ofthePatent Law, section 24subsection 1of
theUtility Model Law, section 9subsection 1firstsentence oftheSemiconductor Protection Law,
section 37subsection 1oftheVarieties Protection Law, Section 14subsection 5oftheTrade Mark
Law, section 14asubsection 1oftheDesigns Lawandsection 97subsection 1oftheCopyright Law).
Thisrightmaybeasserted bymeans ofaprovisional disposition inaccordance withsections 935and
940oftheCode ofCivil Procedure.
Inorder toprotect items ofevidence, theinjured party mayapply forseparate proceedings
tobecarried outforthetaking ofevidence inaccordance withsections 485through 494aoftheCode
ofCivil Procedure. Inthisframework, inspection, questioning ofwitnesses orappraisal byanexpert
maybeordered. Thisispossible withtheconsent oftheopposing party orifthere isapprehension
thattheevidence willbelostoritsusemade difficult orwhen thepresent condition ofathing isto
bedetermined andthepetitioner hasalegitimate interest insuchdetermination (section 485subsection 1
oftheCode ofCivil Procedure). Thisprocedure therefore serves tosafeguard evidence which the
applicant isalready abletoidentify inconcrete terms. Heorshemaynotuseitinorder togenerally
seekevidence from theopposing party.
Protectionofevidencemayalsobeaffordedtotheinjuredpartybyassertingtheabove-mentioned
rights toinformation andtothesubmission ofdocuments (section 810oftheCivilCode) ortoinspection
ofanitem(section 809oftheCivilCode). These canbeasserted withtheaidofaprovisional disposition
inaccordance withsections 935and940oftheCode ofCivil Procedure.IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page10
11. Inwhat circumstances maysuchmeasures beordered inaudita altera parte?
Inaccordance withsection 936inconjunction withsection 921subsection 1oftheCode of
CivilProcedure, aprovisional disposition maybeissued without anoralhearing, andhence alsowithout
hearing theopposing party. Inurgent cases, inaccordance withsection 944oftheCode ofCivil
Procedure, thepresiding judge ofthecompetent chamber mayevendecide alone. Inaccordance with
section 936inconjunction withsection 929subsection 3oftheCode ofCivilProcedure, itsenforcement
ispermissible evenbefore theorder containing theprovisional disposition hasbeenserved onthe
opposing party.
Thecourtmayalsodecidetocarryouttheabove-mentionedseparateproceedingstotakeevidence
without anoralhearing (section 490Code ofCivil Procedure). Inaccordance withsection 491of
theCode ofCivil Procedure, however, theopposing party "insofar asthiscanoccur inaccordance
withthecircumstances ofthecase" isthentobe"summoned ingood timetoappear atthehearing
setforthetaking ofevidence sothatheorshemayassert hisorherrights atthishearing".
12. Describe themain procedures fortheinitiation, ordering andmaintenance inforce of
provisional measures, inparticular relevant time-limits andsafeguards toprotect thelegitimate
interests ofthedefendant.
Aprovisional disposition isordered iftheinjured party "credibly establishes" (section 294
oftheCode ofCivil Procedure) thatheorsheisentitled totherightwhich heorshewishes toassert,
andthatthere isreason tofeareither thatachange totheexisting condition would prevent theright
being realised, ormake thismuch more difficult (section 935oftheCode ofCivil Procedure), orthat
theprovisional disposition "appears necessary inorder toavoid substantial detriment ortoprevent
imminent violence" (section 940oftheCode ofCivil Procedure). Thecontent oftheprovisional
disposition isdetermined bycourtatitsdiscretion. Forinstance itmayissueinstructions orprohibitions
ororder sequestration (section 938oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
Ifthecourt regards anoralhearing asbeing necessary inorder toclarify facts, itdecides by
means ofajudgement, otherwise byaruling (section 936inconjunction withsection 922oftheCode
ofCivil Procedure). Theopposing party mayfileanobjection against theruling. Thisobjection is
thendecided upon bymeans ofajudgement afteranoralsession ofthecourt. Thisjudgement can
besubject toanappeal byoneoftheparties.
Ifthemain issue isnotpending thecourt may, upon request, order thattheparty which has
obtained theprovisional disposition istofileanaction within atimelimittobedetermined bythecourt
(section 936inconjunction withsection 926oftheCode ofCivil Procedure). Ifthisdoesnothappen,
thecourt cancels theprovisional disposition.
Inaccordance withsection 936inconjuntion withsection 927oftheCode ofCivil Procedure,
theopposing party mayalsoapply fortheprovisional disposition tobecancelled because ofchanged
circumstances. Inaccordance withsection 939oftheCode ofCivil Procedure, thecourt maycancel
theprovisional disposition onlyinexceptional cases "under special circumstances", andonpayment
ofasecurity.
Theprovisional disposition isexecuted inaccordance withthegeneral provisions onexecution
(sections 704etseqq. oftheCode ofCivil Procedure). Instructions andprohibitions mayalsobe
enforced bycoercive means (sections 888and890oftheCode ofCivilProcedure). Rights tosurrender
arecoerced withtheassistance ofthebailiff (section 883oftheCode ofCivil Procedure), whoisalso
entitled tosearch premises (section 758oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page11
Theperson whohasbrought about theprovisional disposition must begin execution within
onemonth (section 936inconjunction withsection 929subsection 2oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
Execution isnotpermissible afterthisperiod. Ashasbeenmentioned, execution ofaprovisional
disposition mayalsobepermissible evenbefore ithasbeenserved ontheopposing party. Service must
thenhowever besubsequently performed within oneweek (section 936inconjunction withsection 929
subsection 3oftheCode ofCivil Procedure).
13. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
Cf.atquestion 8above.
(b) Administrative measures
14. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative provisional measures .
Withtheexceptionofbordermeasures(cf.15.-19.below)thereisnoprovisionforadministrative
proceedings relating toviolations ofrights, cf.,alsoquestion 9above.
Special Requirements Related toBorder Measures
Preliminary remark:
Inaddition totheGerman lawdescribed below, theCouncil Regulation (EC) No.3295/94
of22December 1994laying down measures toprohibit therelease forfreecirculation, export, re-export
orentry forasuspensive procedure ofcounterfeit andpirated goods (OJECNo.L341/8 of
30December 1994) isapplicable inGermany.
15. Indicate forwhich goods itispossible toapply forthesuspension bythecustoms authorities
oftherelease intofreecirculation, inparticular whether these procedures areavailable alsoin
respect ofgoods which involve infringements ofintellectual property rights other thancounterfeit
trademark orpirated copyright goods asdefined intheTRIPS Agreement (footnote toArticle 51).
Specify, together with relevant criteria, anyimports excluded from theapplication ofsuch
procedures (such asgoods from another member ofacustoms union, goods intransit ordeminimis
imports). Dotheprocedures apply toimports ofgoods putonthemarket inanother country
byorwiththeconsent oftheright holder andtogoods destined forexportation?
Onrequest,andonpaymentofasecuritybytherightholder,ontheirimportationorexportation,
articles violating arightaresubject toseizure bythecustoms authorities iftheviolation oftheright
isobvious. Thatsaid,thisapplies intrade withother Member States oftheEuropean Community
onlywhere customs checks takeplace.
Thefollowing articles areliable tobeseized:
- aproduct thatinfringes apatent, autility model orthetopography ofamicroelectronic
semiconductor product (section 142a subsection 1ofthePatent Law, section 25a
subsection 1oftheUtility Model Law, section 9subsection 2oftheSemiconductor
Products Protection Actinconjunction withsection 25aoftheUtility Model Law);
- material relating toplant variety protection afforded inGermany (section 40a
subsection 1oftheVarieties Protection Law);IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page12
- goods which havebeenillegally furnished withaprotected trademark orcommercial
sign,unless Council Regulation (EC)No.3842/86 of1December 1986laying down
measures toprohibit therelease forfreecirculation ofcounterfeit goods (OJEC
No.L357,p.1)isapplicable (section 146subsection 1oftheTrade Mark Law), and
goods which havebeenillegally furnished withaprotected indication ofgeographical
origin (section 151oftheTrade Mark Law);
- duplicates themanufacture ordissemination ofwhich isinviolation ofaprotected utility
model rightorcopyright (section 14asubsection 3oftheDesigns Lawinconjunction
withsection 111aoftheCopyright Lawandsection 111asubsection 1oftheCopyright
Law).
With theexception ofsection 151subsection 1oftheTrade Mark Law, these provisions do
notcover transit ifnosalestransactions areeffected inGermany. Importation byprivate individuals
isalsonotcovered ifitisunlikely thattheimported goods willbesubsequently brought intocommercial
exchange inGermany (cf.thegrounds oftheFederal Government 'sDraft Bill,Federal Parliament
Publication 11/4792 dated 15June1989, p.41).
Theprovisions contain noexpress exclusion ofitems violating rights which havebeenbrought
intocommercial exchange inathirdcountry either byorwiththeconsent oftherightholder.
16. Provide adescription ofthemain elements oftheprocedures relating tothesuspension
oftherelease ofgoods bycustoms authorities, inparticular thecompetent authorities (Article 51),
therequirements foranapplication (Article 52)andvarious requirements related totheduration
ofsuspension (Article 55). How have Articles 53(security orequivalent assurance), 56
(indemnification oftheimporter andoftheowner ofthegoods) and57(right ofinspection and
information) been implemented?
Theprocedure isthesameforallrights. Therightholder, oraperson empowered bythelatter,
mayfileanapplication withtheRegional Finance Office forseizure attheborder. Local jurisdiction
isinaccordance withtheplace ofresidence orthecompany headquarters oftheapplicant. Foreign
applicants should approach Munich Regional Finance Office (Sophienstr. 6,D-80333 München,
Tel.: +49/89/59952313, Fax:+49/89/59951150). There arenorequirements asregards theformand
deadlines. Theapplicant must however document theright which hasbeenviolated andhisorher
entitlement tofileanapplication, aswellasdescribe thearticles which aretobeseized. Ifnoshorter
period wasapplied for,theapplication isvalid fortwoyears andmaybeextended onrequest once
thisdeadline hasexpired.
Depending ontheadministrative effort andtheeconomic significance, thefeefortheapplication
isbetween DM60and600. Inthisrespect, therelevant statutes refer tosection 178oftheFiscal
Code(Abgabenordnung) andsection 12subsection 1second sentence oftheCustoms Charges Ordinance
(Zollkostenverordnung -ZKostO). Inaddition, storage costs (section 10oftheCustoms Charges
Ordinance) andexpenses (section 12subsection 2oftheCustoms Charges Ordinance inconjunction
withsection 10subsection 1Nos.1,5and8oftheAdministrative Costs Ordinance -VwKostO) are
levied.
Applicants aretoprovide asecurity which should besuchastocover aclaim fordamages
onthepartofthose concerned bytheseizure.
Ifallpreconditions forseizure aremet,theRegional Finance Office instructs thecustoms offices
toexamine packages, andwhere appropriate toseizethem. Assoonasseizure isordered, thecustoms
authority istoinform without delay theapplicant andtheperson whoisentitled todispose oftheseizedIP/N/6/DEU/1
Page13
items. Theapplicant mustalsobeinformed oftheorigin, thenumber andtheplace ofstorage ofthe
articles which havebeenseized, aswellasofthename andaddress oftheperson entitled todispose
oftheitems. Thelatter isafforded theopportunity toinspect thegoods unless thisconstitutes aviolation
ofbusiness orcompany secrets.
Theperson entitled todispose oftheitems mayfileanobjection withthecustoms authority
issuing theorder within twoweeks aftertheseizure order hasbeenserved. Theobjection doesnot
havetocontain grounds. Ifnoobjection isreceived, thecustoms authority orders confiscation ofthe
items which havebeenseized. Iftheperson entitled todispose oftheitems filesanobjection, the
applicant isthusinformed without delay. Iftheapplicant doesnotthereupon withdraw hisapplication,
hemustsubmit anenforceable court decision within twoweeks afterthenotification isserved ordering
thestorage oftheseized goods orarestraint ondisposal. Asarule,thiswillbeaprovisional disposition
which isissued inaccordance withtheprocedure described above (at12.). Iftheapplicant demonstrates
thatthecourt decision hasbeenapplied forbutthathehasnotyetreceived it,seizure isupheld for
amaximum oftwomore weeks. Ifwithin thistimelimittheapplicant isunable tosubmit acourt
decision, thecustoms authority rescinds seizure.
Theperson entitled todispose oftheitems mayoppose seizure andconfiscation bytheremedies
allowed bythefixed penalty procedure under theLaw onMinor Offences (Gesetz über
Ordnungswidrigkeiten -OWiG). Thisperson mayfileanobjection against confiscation withthecustoms
authority issuing theorder within aweek afterthenotification hasbeenserved (section 67oftheAct
onAdministrative Offences). Inorder toexamine seizure, acourt decision maybeapplied foratthe
authority issuing theorder, orinurgent cases fromthecompetent Local Court which hasjurisdiction.
Animmediate appeal liesfrom thedecision oftheLocal Court.
If(1)theseizure proves tohavebeenunjustified from theoutset, and(2)theapplicant has
notwithdrawn theapplication inspiteoftheobjection fromtheperson entitled todispose oftheitems,
theapplicant isobligated topaydamages tothelatter. Inaddition, aclaim fordamages mayemerge
fromsection 945oftheCode ofCivil Procedure iftheapplicant hasobtained aprovisional disposition
theordering ofwhich hassubsequently proven tohavebeenunjustified from theoutset (seeabove).
17. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost. How longisthevalidity ofdecisions
bythecompetent authorities forthesuspension oftherelease ofgoods intofreecirculation?
There arenostatistics relating totheduration andcostofborder seizure proceedings. The
timelimits laiddown inthelawemerge from theprevious answer describing theprocedure.
18. Arecompetent authorities required toactupon their owninitiative and,ifso,inwhat
circumstances? Arethere anyspecial provisions applicable toexofficio action?
Ingeneral, thecustoms authorities mayonlyactuponarequest. Inaccordance withArticle 4
oftheabove-mentioned EECOrdinance No.3295/94 which isdirectly applicable inGermany, they
mayalsoactexofficio under certain circumstances.IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page14
19. Describe theremedies thatthecompetent authorities havetheauthority toorder andany
criteria regulating their use.
Ashasbeenstated intheanswers toquestions 16and17,thecustoms authorities mayseize
items which violate intellectual property rights iftheviolation oftherightisobvious. Ifnoobjection
ismade toseizure, thecustoms authorities order confiscation oftheitems which havebeenseized.
Iftheconfiscation order hasnotbeenchallenged bytheperson entitled todispose oftheitems within
thetimelimitforobjections, asaruletheseized items aredestroyed bythecustoms authority.
Criminal Procedures
20. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overcriminal actsofinfringement ofIPRs.
Court jurisdiction isinaccordance withthegeneral provisions. Thus, inaccordance with
section 24subsection 1oftheCourts Constitution Actonprinciple theLocal Courts havejurisdiction,
unless inindividual casespunishment ofmorethanfouryears'imprisonment istobeexpected (No. 2).
21. Inrespect ofwhich infringements ofwhich intellectual property rights arecriminal
procedures andpenalties available?
Allintellectual property rights arealsoprotected bycriminal provisions:
- Patents: section 142ofthePatent Law;
- Utility models: section 25oftheUtility Model Law;
- Rights relating totopographies ofmicroelectronic semiconductor products: section 10
oftheSemiconductor Protection Law;
- Plant Varieties Protection: section 39oftheVarieties Protection Law;
- Trademarks: section 143oftheTrade Mark Law;
- Indications ofgeographical origin: section 144oftheTrade Mark Law;
- Designs: section 14oftheDesigns Law;
- Copyright: sections 106-111oftheCopyright Law.
22. Which public authorities areresponsible forinitiating criminal proceedings? Arethey
required todothisontheir owninitiative and/or inresponse tocomplaints?
Inprinciple, thepublic prosecution offices andtheauthorities andofficers ofthepolice service
areobligated toprosecute criminal offences exofficio (sections 152,158subsection 1,160and163
oftheCode ofCriminal Procedure). Violations ofintellectual property rights which constitute criminal
offences are,however, prosecuted onlyuponrequest, unless theprosecution authorities deem thatex
officio prosecution isjustified inviewoftheparticular public interest, orunless theoffender actsby
wayoftrade (section 142subsection 4ofthePatent Law, section 25subsection 4oftheUtility Model
Law, section 10subsection 4oftheSemiconductor Protection Law, section 39subsection 4ofthe
Varieties Protection Law, section 143subsection 4oftheTrade Mark Law, section 14subsection 4
oftheDesigns Lawandsection 109oftheCopyright Law).IP/N/6/DEU/1
Page15
23. Doprivate persons have standing toinitiate criminal proceedings and,ifso,who?
Section 374oftheCode ofCriminal Procedure provides thatactswhich constitute offences
inaccordance withsection 142subsection 1ofthePatent Law, section 25subsection 1oftheUtility
Model Law, section 10subsection 1oftheSemiconductor Protection Law, section 39subsection 1
oftheVarieties Protection Law, section 143subsection 1,section 144subsection 1and2oftheTrade
Mark Law, section 14subsection 1oftheDesigns Lawandsections 106through 108oftheCopyright
Lawmaybeprosecuted byaprivate action without theprosecution authorities having tointervene.
Theprosecution authorities, inturn, fileapublic action ifaparticular public interest exists
inprosecution, oriftheoffender hasacted bywayoftrade (cf.above at22.onthismatter). Then,
section 395subsection 2No.3oftheCode ofCriminal Procedure affords theinjured party the
opportunity tojointheproceedings asajointplaintiff.
24. Specify, bycategory ofIPRandtypeofinfringement where necessary, thepenalties and
other remedies thatmaybeimposed:
- imprisonment;
- monetary fines;
- seizure,forfeitureanddestructionofinfringinggoodsandmaterialsandimplements
fortheir production;
- other.
Imprisonment andfines:
Alloftheabove-mentioned criminal provisions threaten intentional violations ofrights with
imprisonment ofuptothreeyears orwithafine(section 142subsection 1ofthePatent Law, section 25
subsection 1oftheUtility Model Law, section 10subsection 1oftheSemiconductor Protection Law,
section 39subsection 1oftheVarieties Protection Law, section 143subsection 1oftheTrade Mark
Law, section 14subsection 1oftheDesigns Law, aswellassections 106through 108oftheCopyright
Law). Unlawful useofindications ofgeographical origin isthreatened withuptotwoyears'
imprisonment orwithafine(section 144subsections 1and2oftheTrade Mark Law). Iftheoffender
actsbywayoftrade, inthecaseofallintentional violations ofrights, withtheexception ofunlawful
useofindications ofgeographical origin, thepunishment isuptofiveyears'imprisonment orafine
(section 142subsection 2ofthePatent Law, section 25subsection 2oftheUtility Model Law, section
10subsection 2oftheSemiconductor Protection Law,section 39subsection 2oftheVarieties Protection
Law, section 143subsection 2oftheTrade Mark Law, section 14subsection 2oftheDesigns Law
andsection 108aoftheCopyright Law).
Seizure:
Inallcases ofpunishable violations ofrights, thecourt mayorder theseizure ofobjects
implicated inanoffence (section 142subsection 5ofthePatent Law, section 25subsection 5ofthe
UtilityModelLaw,section10subsection5oftheSemiconductorProtectionLaw,section39subsection5
oftheVarietiesProtectionLaw,section143subsection5oftheTradeMarkLaw,section14subsection4
oftheDesigns Lawandsection 110oftheCopyright Law). According tosection 74aoftheCriminal
Code evensuchitems maybeseized which belong toaperson other thantheoffender orparticipant,
ifthisperson hasatleastnegligently implicated theseitems intheoffence oritspreparation (section 74aIP/N/6/DEU/1
Page16
No.1oftheCriminal Code), orifhehasacquired theitems inareproachable manner intheknowledge
ofcircumstances which would havegiven risetoseizure (section 74aNo.2oftheCriminal Code).
Inconvicting persons ofunlawful useofindications ofgeographical origin, thecourtdetermines
thattheunlawful signontheitems which areinthepossession oftheconvict aretoberemoved or,
ifthisisimpossible, thattheitems aretobedestroyed (section 144subsection 4oftheTrade Mark
Law).
Other sanctions:
Inallcases ofpunishable violations ofrights, attherequest oftheinjured party thecourt may
order thepublication oftheconviction where theinjured party demonstrates alegitimate interest in
this(section 142subsection 6ofthePatent Law, section 25subsection 6oftheUtility Model Law,
section 10subsection 6oftheSemiconductor Protection Law, section 39subsection 6oftheVarieties
Protection Law, section 143subsection 6oftheTrade Mark Law, section 14subsection 6oftheDesigns
Lawandsection 111oftheCopyright Law).
25. Describeprovisionsgoverningthelengthandanycostofproceedings.Provideanyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost, ifany.
Theduration oftheproceedings isnotgoverned bystatute. Thedistribution ofcostsincriminal
proceedings emerges fromsections 464etseqq.oftheCode ofCriminal Procedure. According tothis
provision,onprincipletheconvictbearsthecostsoftheproceedings,includingthoseofthejointplaintiff.
Theamount ofthecosts laiddown intheCourt Costs Act,andlawyers 'feesintheFederal Code of
Lawyers 'Fees.
Noempirical studies existrelating totheduration andcostofcriminal proceedings relating
toviolations ofintellectual property rights.