CASE 1. ERICA’s IMPROVED BEER MARKET SOFTWARE

A.1. BASE CASE

Frank heads a major beer producing company. In the 1970s, he developed a computer programme which analyses regional patterns of beer distribution and beer consumption. Since then, he has constantly refined the programme and has freely distributed the programme to his traders, trade associations and market analysts. Over time, the programme became the standard instrument to analyse the beer market. Without using it, one cannot be active on this market. Therefore Erica, a former trader of Frank’s products and now director of a major competitor of Frank, started to model her own distribution system on Frank’s system. Does Frank have a right to an injunction arguing that the computer programme is his?

B.1. CASE MODIFICATION

Frank does license the programme to Erica under the obligation not to improve it and not to market the programme without his permission. Can Frank claim an injunction if Erica improves the programme and markets it without Frank’s prior consent?

CASE 2. MEDICAL RESEARCH (PUBLIC HEALTH – MODELLED ON BRCA1/2 AND CCR5)

A.1. CASE

Mary, owner of a small biotech company, was granted a patent on the gene BRAU-7. As a utility, the patent accounts for cardiovascular diseases. Five years after the patent was granted, her competitor John found out that the gene BRAU-7, in conjunction with the gene BLIB-5, is responsible for healing wounds.

The proportional relationship to which each gene accounts for the healing process is scientifically unclear. John is also granted a patent on his invention. He sets up a business and starts producing an ointment.

Does Mary have a claim for injunction against John?

CASE 3. CULTURE – THIRD PARTY ACCESS (MODELLED ON P2P FILE-SHARING)

A.1. BASE CASE

Carla, a 15-year-old teenager, downloads and uploads songs from the Internet and exchanges CDs with her girlfriend Karen. She is now sued by the record company ‘string’.

Will an injunction be granted ?

B.1. MODIFICATION

At the same time, ‘string’ is seeking an injunction against the Internet-based music provider ‘Keep Mov’n’, whose site has become the most popular music exchange site.