Tuesday Tiddlywinks
27 views
Skip to first unread message
Söğüt Atilla-Aydın
Jun 30, 2026, 4:22:28 PM (15 hours ago) Jun 30
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to ipkat_...@googlegroups.com
Tuesday Tiddlywinks
With one heatwave behind the European readers and another potentially on the horizon, it’s easy to have melted away from the newsfeeds. Worry not, as the IPKat is here to provide you with the latest events, news, and opportunities happening in the IP world!
Events
Hidden Decisions: Mapping the Discretion Built into AI Systems
Bucerius Law School is organising a hybrid interdisciplinary conference on 29 October 2026, seeking to map the decision spaces embedded in the design of AI systems and discuss who occupies them, how they are and should be used, and where law can meaningfully engage. The conference will feature three panels and address the issues from the perspectives of ethics, law, and computer science. Further details and the programme of the conference here.ECTA 45th Annual Conference “La Dolce IP”
ECTA announced that the 45th Annual Conference “La Dolce IP” will take place in Sorrento, Italy between 16 and 19 June 2027. Make sure to keep an eye out for its early-bird registrations, opening in November. More information here.
Opportunities
The ALAI European Authors’ Right Award
The Ninth edition of the ALAI European Authors’ Right Award, supported by GESAC, is now open. Master’s or doctoral level students working on copyright law – or droit d’auteur – are invited to submit, first, an abstract together with the application form by 13 November 2026; then, selected applicants will be asked to submit their essays by 12 February 2027. Submissions can be in English or French. The winner will receive a prize of €2,000, an invitation to attend the international ALAI Congress, and a one-year membership in a national group of their country of residence. More details, eligibility criteria, and application form here.News
Dutch Council for Culture released a report on AI, culture, and creativity
On 25 June, the Dutch Council for Culture (Raad voor Cultuur) released a report, ‘Artistic over artificial: towards a value-driven application of AI for the cultural and creative sector’, expressing concerns on AI tools being predominantly developed and trained by a small number of US companies which are focused not on promoting or sustaining cultural values, but rather on maximising profits. As AI has become a ‘cultural technology’, the Council recommends initiating an incentive programme called ‘Towards a European AI Culture’, under which a Government Commissioner for AI is to be assigned and a ‘content levy’ is to be imposed for AI providers offering their tools in the Netherlands. Further details and the report here.
As courts increasingly treat FRAND as an objective, judicially ascertainable benchmark, FRAND ceases to be just a negotiation outcome and becomes a normative yardstick against which agreed terms can be measured. Once FRAND is framed this way, long‑term licences can be tested ex post for material divergence from that benchmark. Yet any attempt to revisit completed deals runs into core contract‑law values: pacta sunt servanda, conscious allocation of valuation risk between sophisticated parties, and the systemic importance of stability in long‑term licensing relationships.
Taking Portuguese civil law as a reference point – with clear analogies in German and French law – several potential routes for supra‑FRAND clawback can be explored. These include (i) error as to the basis of the transaction (allowing surgical ex tunc price adjustment without destroying the licence), (ii) usury and partial invalidity of a price clause in cases of manifest exploitation, (iii) change of circumstances (rebus sic stantibus) where later FRAND determinations disrupt the contractual equilibrium, and (iv) unjust enrichment where payments exceeding a FRAND‑compliant “cause” lack sufficient justification despite a valid licence.
A more detailed analysis of these issues is provided in the blog post authored by Filipe Gomes, available at: The “Supra-FRAND” Clawback: Is Restitution the Next Frontier in SEP Litigation? | Kluwer Patent Blog.
The “Supra-FRAND” Clawback: Is Restitution the Next Frontier in SEP Litigation? | Filipe Gomes
In the world of standard‑essential patents (SEPs), many implementers – especially SMEs – accept high royalties early on to avoid litigation, at a time when no court has yet fixed a concrete FRAND rate. Years later, decisions on the same portfolio may reveal that those royalties lay outside any plausible FRAND range. This raises a stark question: is that overpayment merely the price of legal certainty, or does private law allow a clawback of “supra‑FRAND” royalties?As courts increasingly treat FRAND as an objective, judicially ascertainable benchmark, FRAND ceases to be just a negotiation outcome and becomes a normative yardstick against which agreed terms can be measured. Once FRAND is framed this way, long‑term licences can be tested ex post for material divergence from that benchmark. Yet any attempt to revisit completed deals runs into core contract‑law values: pacta sunt servanda, conscious allocation of valuation risk between sophisticated parties, and the systemic importance of stability in long‑term licensing relationships.
Taking Portuguese civil law as a reference point – with clear analogies in German and French law – several potential routes for supra‑FRAND clawback can be explored. These include (i) error as to the basis of the transaction (allowing surgical ex tunc price adjustment without destroying the licence), (ii) usury and partial invalidity of a price clause in cases of manifest exploitation, (iii) change of circumstances (rebus sic stantibus) where later FRAND determinations disrupt the contractual equilibrium, and (iv) unjust enrichment where payments exceeding a FRAND‑compliant “cause” lack sufficient justification despite a valid licence.
A more detailed analysis of these issues is provided in the blog post authored by Filipe Gomes, available at: The “Supra-FRAND” Clawback: Is Restitution the Next Frontier in SEP Litigation? | Kluwer Patent Blog.
Photo by Söğüt Atilla-Aydın
Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our 'Policies' section. If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages