UPC Dusseldorf grants Canon unitary injunction against rival cartridge maker; SEP analogy, eco grace period, other remedial questions addressed

Context:

• Consistent with Art. 15 of the EU Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED), Art. 80 of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement (UPCA) governs the court-ordered publication of infringement rulings: “The Court may order, at the request of the applicant and at the expense of the infringer, appropriate measures for the dissemination of information concerning the Court’s decision, including displaying the decision and publishing it in full or in part in public media.”
• Late last year, the UPC’s Court of Appeal (CoA) clarified in Seoul Viosys v. expert e-Commerce the rather exacting requirements for challenging an official patent translation (November 6, 2025 ip fray article).
• Antitrust defenses to patent injunctions (effectively, a claim for compulsory licensing) are not limited to standard-essential patents (SEPs), but the hurdle is high.
• The EU Ecodesign Directive (Directive 2009/125/EC in its original form did not specifically address printer cartridges and certain other circular products. the industry avoided mandatory regulations by using a Voluntary Agreement (VA) regarding efficiency and recyclability. hese voluntary agreements were widely criticized for being weak, particularly because they often excluded cartridges or failed to prevent “firmware locks” that stopped third-party remanufactured cartridges from working. There have been other legislative developments. In 2024, the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) entered into force (European Commission web page on the ESPR).