That’s quite a job!

The full job specification can be found by clicking here.

We shall watch this closely to see who is appointed and will then speculate wildly to try and second guess what the appointment will mean for the future of the CPVO and European PVRs.

There are two news stories this week related to Plant Variety Rights – both are worth looking at.

Firstly, Marco van Noort and Blooms of Bressingham have come to agreement over a long running dispute concerning two very similar varieties of Geranium, Rozanne (Gerwat) and Jolly Bee. Horticulture Week covers the story here. As I have written in the comments at Horticulture Week, I think that this whole episode illustrates the need for more robust DUS testing during the PVR application process and, in particular, an increase in the “minimum distance” between a candidate variety and the comparator varieties. CIOPORA has a working group on DUS at the moment, so I’m hoping that the organisation will soon have a strong lobbying position to take to the CPVO and others. My impression from the recent CIOPORA conference in Seville was that breeders generally would prefer to see minimum distances increased, provided of course that we have an understanding of what the minimum distance required to pass the distinctiveness test should be.

Secondly, the long-running Schräder versus CPVO case seems finally to have reached a conclusion. IPKat reports on it here and the official record of the judgment of the European Court of Justice can be found here. This judgment will give the CPVO more confidence, I think, and reinforces its existing procedures. It also rather serves as a salutary warning for applicants that they really need to be sure of their facts! I honestly think that, if the applicant is invited to the DUS examination trial and cannot identify his own variety when growing alongside the comparator, trouble lies ahead!

Horticulture Week has picked up the story on the exclusion of Plant Variety Rights from the proposed “Patent Box”. See here.

(Note: this is the text of a press release issued by PFE today)

In the last Pre-Budget Report, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a consultation on a proposed “Patent Box” which would offer UK companies a reduced rate of Corporation Tax (10%) on all income derived from patents.

Graham Spencer, owner of Plants For Europe Limited, the Sussex-based independent plant breeders’ agent, immediately set to work to lobby the Government to include income from Plant Variety Rights in the Patent Box. Stephen Timms MP, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, has now written to Graham Spencer, via Charles Hendry MP, to confirm that no form of intellectual property other than patent will be included.

“This is deeply dismaying”, said Graham Spencer. “Plant varieties are excluded from the patent system in the UK and European Union by law – this is the reason why Plant Variety Rights legislation exists, in order to give plant breeders protection of their property rights. To exclude Plant Variety Rights from the Patent Box is discriminatory and is a disincentive to breeders of ornamental and food crops – an area where British breeders and growers have traditionally been amongst world leaders. Plant breeding is an expensive process and inclusion would help to encourage this innovation-based industry.”

But the fight does not end here. “I will now be asking industry bodies, both nationally and internationally, to join in lobbying both this government and the next administration to include Plant Variety Rights if and when the Patent Box becomes law”, said Graham Spencer. “I also call on my colleagues in the plant breeding and intellectual property rights business to enlist the support of their MPs to apply pressure on this subject.”

The Fleuroselect organisation has recently held a conference to discuss the relative merits and conflicts between utility patents for plant technologies and “traditional” plant variety rights. You can read the press release here.

This is a complicated issue and is likely to impact on “smaller” breeders more and more in the coming years. In general, it is likely to make protection costs greater for “big genera” (food and cut flower crops) and force independent breeders into more niche products. It may also make it harder to develop a profit from plant breeding in some of the important genera. On the other hand, such high costs mean that utility patents may not have applications in the smaller volume genera that are popular in the garden plant market and so may be less of barrier to breeders of these plants than to those working with major crops. The biggest problem might arise where there are “crossover” crops – for example, cut flower crops such as Solidago, Hypericum, Rosa that are also used as garden plants.

In any case, this is a topic that PFE will be monitoring in the coming months and years. At present, we feel that the breeders’ exemption coupled with effective essentially derived variety regulation offers the best compromise between protecting the interests of variety owners and those who wish to innovate and develop new varieties.

EDIT: today, the Chancellor has announced a reduced rate of Corporation Tax of 10% for profits derived from patents, effective 2013. It is not yet clear how this will work, but there is no mention of it applying to Plant Variety Rights. Two things come out of this – it is likely that small breeders will do well to become Limited Companies to make the most of this change if they derive income from patents. But those that use only the PVR system are likely to be further disadvantaged.

PFE is attempting to coordinate lobbying of the government to get Plant Variety Rights included in the so called Patent Box legislation bringing in the new reduced rate of tax. Since plant varieties are excluded from the patent system, to exclude PVR would be discriminatory. If you wish to support us or can help in any way, please contact us.

The Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) is set to announce that, from January 2010, the Gazette and most other publications will be available in electronic format only and will be free of charge. This will be a boon to those of us who have found purchasing a subscription to the paper format of the Gazette to be difficult, as obtaining EU publications is limited to only two resellers in the UK who are not always as helpful as they might be (I’ve been awaiting an email response from TSO for, oh, about six months now).

The Gazette is the official record of all applications and grants of Community PVR. Only the Gazette acts as the official record – the online database at the CPVO website carries disclaimers to state that it would not be admissable as evidence and should not be regarded, therefore, as entirely accurate.

The only publication that will continue to be available in paper format will be the annual report. This, and most other publications, have been available in electronic format for some time. Check the EU Bookshop and enter "Community Plant Variety Office" as search term.

From January, the Gazette will be available from www.cpvo.europa.eu as PDF format documents.