WIPO Alternative Dispute Resolution Services 세계지식재산기구 (WIPO) 중재조정센터 Geneva 2013년 2월

Source: The Guardian and New York Times

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Established in October 1994 as part of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Headquarters in Geneva, and a branch office in Singapore Center facilitates the cost and time efficient resolution of commercial disputes between private parties involving intellectual property and technology, through procedures other than court litigation (alternative dispute resolution)

Characteristic of Legal System Patent Litigation in Courts Country Characteristic of Legal System Average Length Average Costs France - Civil Law - Unified Litigation - No specialized courts First Instance: 12-24months Appeal: 18-24 months € 80,000-150,000 (1st Inst.) Germany - Bifurcated Litigation - Specialized courts First Instance: 12 months Appeal: 15-18 months € 50,000 (1st Inst.) € 70,000 (App.) Italy First Instance: Few months – 24 months € 50,000-150,000 (1st Inst.) € 30,000-70,000 (App.) Spain Civil Law - Commercial courts Appeal: 12-24 months € 100,000 (1st Inst.) € 50,000 (App.) UK Common Law - Mediation promoted Court of Appeal: 12 months Supreme Court: 24 months € 550,000-1,500,000 (1st Inst.) € 150,000-1,500,000 (App.) € 150,000-1,500,000 (Supreme Court) China First Instance: 6 months Appeal: 3 months USD 150,000 (1st Inst.) USD 50,000 (App.) Japan First Instance: 14 months Appeal: 9 months USD 300,000 (1st Inst.) USD 100,000 (App.) USA - Common Law Specialized court of appeals (CAFC) Jury trial available Mediation promoted First Instance: up to 24 months Appeal: 12+ months USD 650,000-5,000,000* (1st Inst.) USD 150,000-250,000 (App.) Source: This chart is based on figures provided in Patent Litigation - Jurisdictional Comparisons, Thierry Calame, Massimo Sterpi (ed.), The European Lawyer Ltd, London 2006. * Report of the Economic Survey, Prepared Under the Direction of Law Practice Management Committee, AIPLA, Arlington 2011.

Patent Litigation in Korea Civil Law No Jury Trial Average length: 8 to 18 months (District court action)* Average estimated costs*: District court action – approximately USD 300,000 - 800,000. IPT action – approximately USD 40,000 - 70,000 Supreme Court of Korea 5 Regional High Courts (Special Divisions) Patent Court (Established in 1998) 18 District Courts IP Tribunal (within KIPO) INFRINGEMENT VALIDITY Bifurcated IP litigation Structure of Korea * International Patent Litigation Survey, 2008 Matthew L. Cutler, Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC

Characteristic of Legal System Trademark Litigation in Courts Country Characteristic of Legal System Average Length Average Costs France - Civil Law - No specialized courts (but specialized chambers) First Instance: 9-12 months Appeal: 18-24 months € 10,000-100,000 (1st Inst.) € 10,000-100,000 (App.) Germany - Specialized courts First Instance: 8 months Appeal: 15-18 months € 4,600-80,400 (1st Inst.) € 8,000-98,700 (App.) Italy First Instance: Few months – 24 months Appeal: 12-18 months € 15,000-40,000 (1st Inst.) € 15,000-25,000 (App.) Spain - Commercial courts First Instance: 12 months – UK - Common Law - No specialized courts First Instance: 10-12 months Court of Appeal: 12 months Supreme Court: 24 months £ 100,000-500,000 (1st Inst.) £ 50,000-250,000 (App.) China - No specialized courts (but specialized tribunals) First Instance: 6 months Appeal: 3 months Based on the amount of damages RMB 500-1000 where no claim for monetary amount (1st Inst. and App.) Japan First Instance: 14 months Appeal: 9 months USA First Instance: 2-5 years Appeal: 1-2 years USD 350,000-1,500,000* (1st Inst.) Source: This chart is based on figures provided in Patent Litigation - Jurisdictional Comparisons, Thierry Calame, Massimo Sterpi (ed.), The European Lawyer Ltd, London 2006. * Report of the Economic Survey, Prepared Under the Direction of Law Practice Management Committee, AIPLA, Arlington 2011.

Characteristic of Legal System Copyright Litigation Country Characteristic of Legal System Average Length Average Costs France - Civil Law - No specialized courts First Instance: 12-18 months Appeal: 12-24 months € 5,000-50,000 (1st Inst.) € 5,000-50,000 (App.) Germany - No specialized courts (but specialized chambers within higher courts) First Instance: 6-12 months Appeal: 6-24 months Supreme Court: 2-3 years € 6,100-24,700(1st Inst.) € 7,400-30,500(App.) Italy - Specialized courts First Instance: 18-24 months Appeal: 12-18 months € 15,000-40,000 (1st Inst.) € 15,000-25,000 (App.) Spain - Commercial Courts First Instance: 11 months Appeal: 2-12 months € 20,000-30,000 (1st Inst.) € 15,000-20,000 (App.) UK - Common Law First Instance: 12-13 months Court of Appeal: 6-12 months £ 100,000-500,000 (1st Inst.) £ 100,000-150,000 (App.) China - No specialized courts (but specialized tribunals) First Instance: 6 months (in law) Appeal: 3 months, no limits when foreigners litigate Based on the amount of damages RMB 500-1000 where no claim for monetary amount (1st Inst. and App.) Japan First Instance: 14 months Appeal: 8 months – USA First Instance: several months or years Appeal: several months or years USD 500,000 or more (1st Inst.) Source: This chart is based on figures provided in Copyright Litigation - Jurisdictional Comparisons, Thierry Calame, Massimo Sterpi, Francetti Regoli (ed.), The European Lawyer Ltd, London, 2010.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Mediation, Arbitration, Expert Determination 조정 Mediation: an informal procedure in which a neutral intermediary, the mediator, assists the parties in reaching a settlement of their dispute, based on the parties’ respective interests. The mediator cannot impose a decision. The settlement agreement has the force of a contract. 중재 Arbitration: a procedure in which the parties submit their dispute to one or more chosen arbitrators, for a binding and final decision (award) based on the parties’ respective rights and obligations and enforceable as an award under arbitral law. Arbitration constitutes an alternative to court litigation. 전문가 결정 Expert Determination: a procedure in which the parties submit a specific matter (e.g. technical question) to one or more experts who make a determination on the matter, which can be binding unless the parties have agreed otherwise.

ADR – Benefits and Limitations WIPO Experience Should be Consensual (either before or after a dispute) Benefits International / Neutral Competent Efficient / Flexible Confidential Finality

단일성 / 중립성 In ADR, parties designate a single forum for resolving the entire dispute Comprehensive and consistent resolution, rather than a patchwork of conflicting court decisions No party is forced to litigate in the other’s home country Avoid possible actual or perceived home court advantage of party that litigates in its own country International (procedural) standards WIPO: non-profit, international organization (part of UN) Competitive fee range

전문성 IP disputes tend to be technical/specialized WIPO list of neutrals Most courts are not specialized in IP (IBA 2005 Survey) Possibility of jury (lay people) trial WIPO list of neutrals +1,500 candidates from 70 countries Broad range of ADR, IP and technical backgrounds

당사자 자치 / 효율성 Party control (shortened deadlines) WIPO expedited arbitration case example: Both parties agree on short deadlines for written submissions Sole arbitrator, one day hearing, Award within 5 weeks Parties can submit all or part of the dispute to arbitration E.g.: only one patent covering relevant technology Appeal option WIPO: if agreed, first (one member) and second instance (three members)

WIPO ECAF: Case File Web-based electronic docket Online filing, storage, classification, and communication Security: Authentication + Encryption + Firewall 14 14

비밀유지 WIPO Rules require all participants to preserve confidentiality regarding: Existence of procedure, disclosures made during procedure, result of procedure (settlement, award) Specific provision on protection of trade secrets in arbitral proceedings Preserving relationships Confidentiality helps parties to focus on the merits of the dispute, without concern about its public implications

최종성 / 집행가능성 Facilitated international enforcement mechanism for arbitral awards under the New York Convention (145 Member States) Automatic enforcement of arbitration award Enforceable except limited situations (e.g., lack of due process, against the public policy) Binding only on the parties No public precedent No general declaration of (in)validity No direct office action (registration, cancellation) But: inter partes effect proves mostly sufficient

특수 영역을 위한 WIPO ADR 영화 및 대중매체 ICOM (International Council of Museums) ITPGRFA (International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture) Standard Material Transfer Agreements 저작권 신탁관리단체 R&D (DESCA) 싱가폴 특허청과 협력 민은주, WIPO 중재조정센터

WIPO Center Cases Mediation and Arbitration Cases: +280 Amount in Dispute: USD 20,000 – USD 700,000,000 Remedies: damages, infringement declarations, specific performance, etc. Parties China, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Norway, Panama, Romania, the Russian Federation, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States Place of Arbitration The Netherlands, Germany, the United Kingdom, United States, Switzerland, Italy, France, etc. Leading provider for domain name disputes: +40,000 domain name cases since 1999 e.g., <madonna.com>, <dreamworkstudios.com>, <gossipgirl.com>, <24poker.com>, <cartoonetworkya.com>, etc

WIPO 도메인 이름 분쟁 해결 민은주, WIPO 중재조정센터

WIPO ADR Options Expedited Arbitration Arbitration WIPO Contract Clause/ Submission Agreement Expert Determination Determination Negotiation Mediation Award Settlement

중재요청서에 대한 답변서 및 항변 진술서 (20 일) WIPO 조정 조정요청 조정인 선정 사전 연락 조정 회의 종결 WIPO 중재 중재요청서 중재요청서에 대한 답변서 (30 일) 중재판정부 구성 주장 진술서 (30 일) 항변 진술서(30 days) 심리 절차의 종결 (9 개월) 종국판정 (3 개월) 추가 서면 및 증인의 증언 변론서 한차례 교환 각 단계 단축 단독 중재인 확정된 중재인 수수료 WIPO 신속중재 중재요청서 및 주장 진술서 중재요청서에 대한 답변서 및 항변 진술서 (20 일) 중재판정부 구성 심리 (최장 3일) 절차의 종결 (3 개월) 종국판정 (3 개월)

WIPO Caseload: Types of Procedure

WIPO Cases: Subject Matter

WIPO Cases: Industry

Settlement in WIPO Administered Cases 25 25 25

WIPO 조정 사례 특허침해 분쟁 조정신청 컨설팅 계약의 일환으로 R&D 기업, 제조업체에게 특허발명품 정보 공개 특허권의 이전, 사용허락 없었음 R&D 기업, 제조업체의 판매 상품이 자사의 특허발명품을 담고 있다고 주장 특허 사용허락 협상 실패 복수 관할권에서 특허침해 소송제기? 조정신청 1주일간 조정회의 라이센스계약 및 새로운 컨설팅 계약 체결 총 조정기간: 4개월; 조정인 수수료: USD 24,000

WIPO 중재사례 미국 및 아시아 당사자: 의료기기에 대한 미국 및 유럽 특허 미국 및 아시아 당사자: 의료기기에 대한 미국 및 유럽 특허 미국 및 유럽에서 진행되던 복수 관할권에서의 분쟁후 합의계약 WIPO 중재 조항: 1심 중재판정부: 미국특허-단독 미국중재인; 유럽특허-단독 유럽중재인 항소 중재판정부: 3인 중재판정부 중재지: 뉴욕 당사자 합의사항 중재인 / 중재절차 시일표 / 증거조사 (discovery) 범위 제52조에 따른 비밀 유지 결정 미국 및 유럽 특허 청구범위의 임시적 법적해석 (preliminary claim construction) 중재판정부 구성후 18개월만에 중재판정 교부

WIPO 신속중재 사례 오페라 제작관련 파이낸싱 독일, 스위스/파나마 당사자; 양 당사자 미국 대리인; 독일 계약법; 독일 주재 미국중재인 당사자, 분쟁해결의 긴급성에 동의, 보다 짧은 기한정립에 합의 단일 쟁점 1일 심리 최종 판정: 신청 접수로부터 5주 중재인 수당: USD 20,000

WIPO 수수료표 (중재)

Preliminary WIPO Survey Results: Arbitral Institutions Included in Dispute Resolution Clauses 박은아, WIPO 중재조정센터

기술거래에 있어 분쟁해결에 관한 WIPO 국제조사 예비결과: 계약에 사용된 분쟁해결조항

중재 조항의 작성 필수 요소 표준조항 사용, 제한적으로 변경 적용규칙 준거법 중재인 수 중재지: 중재에 호의적인 장소, 현대적 중재법 절차 언어 표준조항 사용, 제한적으로 변경 박은아, WIPO 중재조정센터

http://www.wipo.int/amc/ko/clauses/ 박은아, WIPO 중재조정센터

기술거래에 있어 분쟁해결에 관한 WIPO 국제조사 예비결과: 시사점 분쟁을 미리 예상 당사자, 권리, 법의 국제적 양상의 가능성에 대비 다른 고려사항보다는 시간과 비용을 최소화할 수 있도록 설계 조정을 포함 중재와 법정소송 중에서 보다 빠르고 비용이 적게 드는 선택으로서 중재를 고려 중재를 선택했을 때는, 분쟁의 규모에 따라 신속중재를 고려 계약외 분쟁에서 당사자간 협상과 중재의 이용가능성 고려 특허소송에서의 분쟁당사자의 통상적인 목적은 재판외 분쟁해결을 통해 효율적으로 이룰 수 있다 박은아, WIPO 중재조정센터