Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
EUROPEAN-SEED.COM I EUROPEAN SEED I 11 Companies can do it alone but it is complicated. Seven years after noticing the first signs of infringement Dutch seed company Rijk Zwaan won a long-running infringement case against Italian company Agriseeds. After illegally reproducing the lettuce variety Ballerina RZ the court of Milan ordered Agriseeds to pay Rijk Zwaan 205701 plus legal costs. On behalf of Rijk Zwaan company lawyer Marian Suelmann says she is happy with the result especially since the number of illegal reproductions of vegetable crops seems to be on the rise. Cases like this are undoubtedly complicated and time- consuming but this example shows that fighting infringement in court can indeed be successful says Suelmann. Unsuccessful Cases Despite its successes at moving ahead with legal action AIB has faced situations where it has decided not to pursue suspected cases of IP infringement. In cases where the exposure in the market is judged to be detrimental to the commercial interest of the individual rights holder it often decides not to pursue the matter. Therefore companies have a strong preference to act jointly in addressing infringement cases van Kempen says. Other reasons for abandoning a case have been the safety of staff. There is a strict rule never to release the name of informants in any procedure. However in certain cases there is fear that the suspected infringer may draw his own and wrong conclusions and react. In case of any doubt on personal safety it is a no-go for AIB says van Kempen. The major factor preventing these cases from being successful according to van Kempen is the lack of an ability to mobilise field staff to report any suspicious activity. The statistics show that only a very small percentage of the total of observed cases are reported. Many industries are fighting piracy and counterfeiting but van Kempen says the vegetable industry is unique in terms of the challenges it faces. There are fundamental differences making our fight more complicated. In most other industries the pirates are third parties which produce the illegal product and sell it as genuine product. The counterfeits are often of inferior quality so the buyer and user of the counterfeit is often victim of the piracy he says. Examples he gives are pesticides spare parts for vehicles and pharmaceutical products. In our sector it is our own customers who are either the infringers in cases of vegetative propagation and seed reproduction or main beneficiaries as buyers and users of the illegal starting material. From the documents found during a recent seizure at a company involved in lettuce seed piracy it emerged that the financial benefit reaped by the lettuce growers who had bought the illegal seed at very low prices amounted to a very significant 900hectare per production cycle. The evolution of the EU protection ratio per species 2013 vs 2012 2009 30th edition CC2012 Additionsto 31st CC2013 Comparison Comparison pending granted Number of PVPrights Ratio No. listed varieties applications PVPtitles Ratio var. added applications Ratio 2014 - 2009 2014 - 2013 Artichoke 16 41 6 27 80 8 3 38 22 -43 Asparagus 27 76 5 37 55 5 3 60 33 5 Aubergine Egg plant 290 3 16 7 24 2 8 2 Broccoli 1 171 14 34 28 17 1 6 4 -22 Cabbage white 1 705 8 95 15 39 0 0 -1 -15 Carrot 1 584 4 50 9 21 2 10 9 0 Cauliflower 1 712 12 93 15 38 6 16 15 1 Chicory 1 212 11 27 18 13 0 0 -1 -18 Corn salad Lambs lettuce 23 62 2 18 32 2 1 50 27 18 Courgette 593 10 26 6 61 2 3 -3 Cucumber Gherkin 2 1292 38 104 11 74 23 31 29 20 Endive 17 255 5 51 22 14 12 86 69 64 Fennel 2 86 4 26 35 3 1 33 31 -2 French bean 15 1329 23 219 18 70 29 41 27 23 Garlic 114 2 12 12 4 0 0 -12 Leek 2 237 9 71 34 15 4 27 24 -7 Lettuce 21 2081 159 653 39 143 92 64 43 25 Melon 4 928 39 83 13 75 11 15 10 2 Onion 3 975 19 76 10 39 3 8 5 -2 Parsley 99 2 11 13 6 2 33 20 Pea 19 732 52 250 41 31 14 45 26 4 Pepper 2 2142 62 158 10 186 24 13 11 3 Spinach 3 340 27 61 26 30 4 13 10 -13 Tomato 2 3537 119 276 11 264 42 16 14 5 TOTAL 7 17593 635 2474 18 1182 281 24 17 6 EUROSEEDS.EU3 PVP EVOLUTION 15102014 HOW HAS THE TOMATO PROTECTION DEVELOPED SINCE 1 OCT 2010 Period 1 October 2010 and 1 October 2014 Total AIB members Other cos New varieties listed 1647 750 897 of which PVP 355 21 333 44 22 2 94 of the new PVP titles went to AIB companies EUROSEEDS.EU4 PVP EVOLUTION 15102014 HOW HAS THE LETTUCE PROTECTION DEVELOPED SINCE 1 OCT 2010 Period 1 October 2010 and 1 October 2014 Total AIB members Other cos New varieties listed 925 722 203 of which PVP 422 46 408 57 14 7 97 of the new PVP titles went to AIB companies The fact that infringers are among our own customers often creates a loyalty dilemma for the sales reps. They are facing a situation whereby a person with whom they often built a relationship over many years is infringing the IP rights of his or her company. In these cases it takes courage to confront the customer with this wrongdoing van Kempen adds. Whereas in general IP rights holders can rely on enforcement agencies like customs agencies to detect piracy our industry has to rely much more on its own people for its detection. The other factor working against the vegetable industry according to van Kempen is that it can detect infringement only during the growing stage. Once the harvested product has left the growers