European Intellectual Property Law offers a full account of the nature, context, and effect of European IP law. The amount and reach of European law- and decision-making in the field of intellectual property has grown exponentially since the 1960s, making it increasingly difficult to treat European IP regimes as mere adjuncts to domestic and international regimes. European Intellectual Property Law responds to this reality by presenting a clear and detailed account of each of the main European IP systems, including the areas of substantive IP law on which they are based. The result is a full account of the European intellectual property field, presented in the context of both the EU legal system and international IP law, including EU constitutional law, the law of the European Patent Convention 1973/2000, and private international law. By drawing selectively on examples from domestic IP regimes, the text also illustrates substantive differences between those regimes and demonstrates the impact of European law and decision-making on EU Member States. The result is a modern treatment of European IP law that goes beyond a discussion of the provisions of individual legal instruments to consider their wider context and effect.

feature Nature BiotechNology | VOL 38 | MAy 2020 | 546-558 | www.nature.com/naturebiotechnology PATENTS Adapting the ordre public and morality exclusion of European patent law to accommodate emerging technologies Patent law's existing public policy exclusion should be reinterpreted and a new method introduced for assessing the moral and public policy implications of commercializing emerging technologies.

No abstract

No abstract

The authoritative (Novartis/transgenic plant systems) interpretation of the Article 53(b) EPC exclusion from European patentability of plant and animal varieties, and essentially biological processes for the creation of plants and animals, is considered, and its significance for the trend of EPO jurisprudence and legitimacy of the EC Biotechnology Patenting Directive noted. The Enlarged Board of Appeal's justification for that interpretation in Novartis with reference to the exclusion's legislative history is challenged, and an alternative theory of that history proposed, based on a thorough analysis of the unpublished travaux préparatoires for the Strasbourg and European Patent Conventions. In addition to elucidating the framers' (actual and presumed) intent with respect to the Article 53(b) exclusion, that analysis offers an insight into post‐war legal unification methodology and its continued impact on one of the most contentious and technical areas of intellectual property law.