European Patent Damage Estimation
Patent damage work in Europe needs a careful structure. Courts review facts, evidence, causation, and national rules. This calculator gives a planning estimate. It does not replace expert valuation or legal advice. It helps teams compare common monetary paths before deeper review.
Why the calculation matters
A claimant may argue lost profit when sales were diverted. The key issue is the but-for world. That means estimating what sales would have happened without infringement. The tool multiplies accused units by the likely captured share. It then applies the claimant unit margin. Price erosion and related sales can also be added.
Royalty based approach
A reasonable royalty is useful when lost sales are hard to prove. It starts with a royalty base. That base can reflect accused revenue or another economic measure. The selected rate should reflect licensing evidence, patent strength, alternatives, and bargaining context. The apportionment field limits value to the patented contribution.
Unfair profit view
Some European assessments also examine benefit gained by the infringer. This tool estimates that value from infringer unit margin. It then applies apportionment. This avoids treating non patented value as patent value. The result is a screening number, not a final award.
Statistical planning features
Damage valuation often contains uncertainty. The calculator includes probability weighting and low and high scenario factors. These inputs help counsel, analysts, and managers see a practical range. They also show which assumptions drive the total. Small changes in sales share or margin can move the result sharply.
Interest and adjustments
The tool adds selected costs, moral prejudice estimates, and simple interest. It also permits a mitigation discount. Use that field when evidence suggests avoidable loss or overlap. Avoid double counting. Do not add the same economic harm under several labels.
How to read results
Use the highest, lowest, and selected method figures as discussion points. Save the CSV for spreadsheet review. Use the PDF for a quick internal note. Keep backup evidence for each input. Real disputes need country specific analysis, procedural rules, expert evidence, and court discretion. Treat every output as an informed estimate only. Update assumptions whenever new disclosure, accounting data, licensing records, or technical apportionment evidence becomes available during the dispute review process.