weekly_edition_820

9 3.5 to 3.10.2018 the three companies would have misused their intellectual property rights over industrial designs in order to prevent the manufacture and sale of auto parts by independent manufacturers represented by the association. The automakers alleged that there would be no illegal conduct, since it would be a legitimate exercise of industrial property rights granted by INPI. They also asserted that there would be no legal provision for restrictions on the exercise of the registration right for different markets. In his point of view, which guided the decision of the competition court, counsel Mauricio Bandeira Maia positioned himself for the filling of the case. For him, the mere exercise of exclusive rights independent of the markets does not provoke the conviction of the automakers. Still according to the counselor, there is no proven conduct capable of establishing abuse of industrial property right. The majority of the Court followed the vote of Maia Flag. Voting - At the meeting of November 22, 2017, the rapporteur of the case, counsel Paulo Burnier, voted for the conviction of the automakers. In the opinion of Burnier, there was abusive exercise of intellectual property rights, with negative effects on the competitive environment of the country, causing damages to consumers without the existence of economic efficiencies that justified the form of exercise of the right by the automakers.