Background
KeeeX, a French SME, brought patent infringement proceedings in the UPC’s Paris Local Division against Adobe, OpenAI, and several other companies over a patent covering a method for externally verifying the integrity and authenticity of digital data blocks. The technology is related to anti-deepfake and content authentication systems, touching on the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) standard — making this OpenAI’s first significant patent lawsuit in Europe.
KeeeX attempted to use the Paris Local Division to assert its European patent not only in UPC contracting states but also in the UK, Switzerland, Spain, Ireland, Norway, and Poland — all of which are European Patent Convention member states but have not joined the UPC Agreement. The Paris Local Division upheld jurisdiction over these non-UPC territories, prompting the defendants to appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The UPC Court of Appeal reversed the Paris Local Division, holding that the UPC has no jurisdiction to adjudicate patent infringement in non-UPC contracting states. The court clarified several important jurisdictional boundaries:
- The UPC’s jurisdiction is limited to UPC contracting states. National long-arm jurisdiction rules (such as those available under French procedural law) cannot be invoked to extend the UPC’s reach beyond its territorial scope.
- Where no defendant is located within UPC territory, the court will only have jurisdiction in respect of damage that has occurred within the UPC territory.
- Claimants seeking to sue defendants based outside UPC territory bear a heightened pleading burden: they must set out both the legal basis relied upon and the facts and evidence justifying jurisdiction at the outset.
Key Takeaways
- The UPC cannot be used as a pan-European patent enforcement forum for all EPC member states — its territorial reach is strictly limited to states that have ratified the UPC Agreement.
- Patent holders cannot bootstrap national long-arm jurisdiction rules into UPC proceedings to reach defendants or territories outside the UPC’s scope.
- This is OpenAI’s first major patent lawsuit in Europe, involving anti-deepfake content authentication technology — a growing area of both innovation and litigation.
- The ruling provides clarity for multinational defendants: being sued in one UPC local division does not automatically expose them to claims covering UK, Swiss, or other non-UPC territory patents.
Why It Matters
As the UPC matures, its jurisdictional boundaries are being tested by creative litigants seeking to use it as a one-stop-shop for European patent enforcement. This ruling draws a firm line: the UPC is a powerful forum for patent litigation across its 18 contracting states, but it is not a replacement for national courts in non-participating countries. For companies like OpenAI and Adobe, the decision limits their exposure in UPC proceedings to the UPC’s actual territory. For patent holders, the message is clear — if you want to enforce your patent in the UK, Switzerland, or Spain, you need to use those countries’ national courts.