infringement
noun · Schutzrechtsverletzung
Schutzrechtsverletzung for the infringement of a patent, trademark or copyright, but the English word stops at the wrong done while German attaches a remedy the claimant shapes, damages by threefold calculation, § 97 Abs. 2 UrhG and its siblings, the claimant choosing the actual loss, the infringer’s profit, or a reasonable royalty. So an infringement is not just a Verletzung but a menu of ways to be paid, plus Unterlassung and Auskunft.
Which translation, when
Why
Infringement in English names the wrong, and German attaches to it a remedy structure the word does not carry. A Schutzrechtsverletzung, of a patent, § 139 PatG, a trademark, § 14 MarkenG, or copyright, § 97 UrhG, opens the same bundle each time, Unterlassung to stop it, Beseitigung, and Schadensersatz to pay for it, and the striking part is how the damages are measured. German lets the claimant choose among three, the dreifache Schadensberechnung, the concrete loss actually suffered, the profit the infringer made, der Verletzergewinn, which is the civil-law cousin of an account of profits, or a reasonable royalty, die Lizenzanalogie, what a licence would have cost, and § 97 Abs. 2 UrhG spells the last two out. The claimant picks the most favourable, so the Verletzergewinn route can strip a profitable infringement of its gain even where the claimant’s own loss was small. Alongside sits der Auskunftsanspruch, § 140b PatG, § 101 UrhG, forcing the infringer to disclose sources and quantities, and claims to recall and destruction. So infringement is a Schutzrechtsverletzung, and the reflex bare Verletzung or a loose Verstoß loses the remedy machinery, above all the choice of damages measure the English word never signals.
Typical mistakes
- A German Schutzrechtsverletzung opens a threefold choice of damages, § 97 Abs. 2 UrhG and its siblings, so translating infringement as a plain wrong misses that the claimant may elect the infringer’s profit or a reasonable royalty over actual loss.
- The infringer can be forced to disclose sources and quantities, der Auskunftsanspruch, § 140b PatG, § 101 UrhG, a claim the English infringement does not announce.
- Verstoß or a bare Verletzung is too loose for the IP sense, so the specific Schutzrechtsverletzung and its statutory claims must not shrink to a generic breach.
What matters
Enforcement clauses undersell the remedy: a German Schutzrechtsverletzung lets the claimant choose damages by actual loss, by the infringer’s profit, or by a reasonable royalty, § 97 Abs. 2 UrhG, and adds a disclosure claim, § 140b PatG. The clause promising only compensation for loss has ignored that the Verletzergewinn route can take the whole gain of the infringement.
What the machine misses
Infringement comes back as Verletzung or a looser Verstoß in machine output, and the word is not wrong but empty of the German remedy, a Schutzrechtsverletzung carries a threefold damages measure, § 97 Abs. 2 UrhG and its siblings, the claimant choosing actual loss, the infringer profit or a reasonable royalty. So a translated infringement reads as a bare wrong when German makes it the trigger for a menu of remedies, and the Verletzergewinn route, which strips the gain of a profitable infringement, drops out of sight along with the disclosure claim, § 140b PatG.
Examples
| patent infringement | die Patentverletzung |
| to infringe a trademark | eine Marke verletzen |
| an account of the infringer’s profits | die Herausgabe des Verletzergewinns |
| damages for infringement | der Schadensersatz wegen Verletzung |
More notes on these sections
trademark Marke