Hot answers tagged

24

That is not at all what USPTO is telling you. Courts do not simply "dismiss" patents - that isn't a terminology you'd ever see used for a patent that was found to be invalid. Timeline of events: United Industries Corporation brought a suit against the owner of the patent, claiming unpatentability. That case went to trial, and the court found the claim to ...


7

You are correct that it is quite expensive to patent something in U.S. law. Under U.S. patent law, once an idea is publicly published, if no one else has a patent application for the same idea that is pending, the idea enters the public domain and no one can obtain a patent of that idea. The publication become "prior art" with respect to any future patent ...


6

A government, in this case the Brazilian government, cannot effectively control what people, particularly people who are not its citizens, do in other countries. If people are able to obtain and ship outside of Brazil supplies of the plant, then the Brazilian government cannot stop them doing research on it. However, the Brazilian government can largely ...


6

This refers to adding a putatively useful feature to the thing. For instance, a drug can have a certain active ingredient, and the patent on the active ingredient can expire, but you may discover a way to make the drug more effective or in some other way more useful (e.g. by reducing side-effects) by coating it with a purple wax. This product can be patented....


5

The patent number is D817,662. The D at the beginning of the number indicates it is a design patent, which only covers the appearance of the patent. Others are free to make products with the same function as long as the appearance is different enough. If the patent number was all digits, it would indicate a utility patent. Utility patents prevent others ...


4

Yes The parties have agreed that the remedy for a breach will be transfer of assets gained as a result. This is not a penalty and seems perfectly valid.


4

It just doesn’t happen. It is prohibited for a patent examiner to get a patent or any interest in a patent other than by inheritance Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 4, patent examiners, other Office employees, and Office officers may not apply for a patent or acquire any right or interest in any patent during the period of their employment with the Office and for ...


4

Copyright and patents are two very very different things. Copyrighting a standard means the wording of the standard can not be copied without the copyright holders permission. It does not protect the ideas expressed in the document, just the way those ideas are expressed. IEEE standards, for example, are copyrighted by the IEEE and therefore you can't make a ...


3

In US law, a trademark application only requires that you are now selling, or intend to sell in the reasonably near future, a product (or service) using the specified name. You don't have to provide an example, or a design, and it does not have to be patented. The applicant might be planning to license someone else's patent, or to market off-the-shelf tech ...


3

There are two parts to the intellectual property here, the patent and the copyrighted software. The patent is owned by its inventor, but there is an implied license; the company awarded a $10,000 bonus, and the inventor then wrote the software in his role as an employee of the company, so his conduct implies acceptance of the company use of the patent in ...


3

No license can create patent protection for the subject of your videos. Licenses apply to the copyright that is inherently created when you create the video. Patents can only be obtained by applying for them through patent offices. Your video would act as prior art if anyone (including yourself, with some exceptions) later tries to apply for patent ...


3

Maybe You linked to the publication of a patent application, not to a patent. Based solely on looking at the format of the number the answer would be, Yes, unless it eventually became an issued patent. As it happens, it did become issued patent US9066511B2. That would make the answer no. Since the application was filed before you started selling them, ...


2

Kellogg v National Biscuit Co is the foundation for the functionality doctrine. Essentially, this ruling means that product designs that are intrinsic to functionality cannot be protected under unfair competition or trademark laws. The expiration of the patent term has no bearing on this--at no point can a trademark claim be made on these functional designs,...


2

First, the issue isn't what information is in a previous patent, but what information in any printed publication ever made anywhere in any language with some caveats, prior to the priority date of the application in question. Novel means new, anticipated means it has been done (or written about) before and is therefore not novel/new. For something to show ...


2

Your interpretation is mostly correct on both points. The previous patent would need to disclose a device with A, B, and C in order to anticipate the claim of the present application. A diagram showing a device with all 3 elements would be sufficient, but so would any other disclosure (e.g., a written description) of a device with all 3 elements. If it had a ...


2

You do not need to able to make it but your application needs to explain how to make it and use it. If a workable implication needs the expertise of a mechanical engineer, you can hire a mechanical engineer. It may turn out that it is impossible, it may turn out that the mechanical engineer needs to be listed as a co-inventor, or it could be straightforward ...


2

The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Trade Mark Regulation Board of the Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys working jointly together as the Intellectual Property Regulation Board (IPReg) have the following rule in their Code of Conduct: Rule 18 – Publicity Publicity and promotional activity of ...


2

You may not propagate patented plants, via cuttings or in any other asexual way, without permission from the patent holder. (You may, however, breed them sexually.) You may not sell multiple plants asexually reproduced from a patented plant, particularly not as part of a business or commercial nursery operation, without permission. But if you obtained an ...


2

There is something called the exhaustion doctrine that says that once the holder of a patent sells a patented device, they have relinquished control over that particular instance of the patent implementation. Anyone who legally purchases this hardware has the right to run whatever software they want on it, as long the software is otherwise legal (software ...


2

Developing and using such software only by yourself/friends/family is fine: the hardware is yours and the vendor has no legally enforceable way to dictate you in which way to use it for personal purpose, what software to run etc. See this question/answer for details. However, if you decide to publish your open source software you may get into legal trouble. ...


2

According to Wikipedia's article on "Intellectual property protection of typefaces" a typeface, that is a set of coordinated shapes making up a set of letters and other characters, is not protected by copyright under US law, and was specifically excluded during the hearings which led up to the passage of the 1976 Copyright Act (the basis of modern US ...


2

Drugs are also (re)patented for different uses. I see that two new patents were granted on uses of asprin recently (March 2019). MARCH 01, 2019 Jennifer Nessel, Assistant Editor The US Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) has granted 2 new patents related to a novel inhaled rapid-onset aspirin formulation (Asprihale, OtiTopic) in development to treat ...


2

Yes. A patent gives its owner the right to try to stop anyone from making, selling, offering for sale, importing or using the patented invention. In fact a method-of-use claim is not infringed by the maker or seller but only by the end-user when it is put into use. In practice there is usually no money in going after end user consumers. However, there was a ...


2

A patent can be fairly broad if it meets the requirements, two of the most important being novelty and non-obviousness. However, it is difficult for an idea to be broad and still meet the requirements. Let's use the Blackberry example. Blackberry almost certainly has some specific patents. But smartphone is way too vague. The desirability for something to ...


1

That is going to depend on the relationship, if any, between (B) and (A), and the evidence, if any, that Peter instructed Alice to do (B), or in some way suggested (B) to Alice. It will also depend on whether Alice was Peter's employee, or a contractor, or if they had some other relationship for purposes of doing (X). It may also depend to some extent on ...


1

Patents are territorial - A U.S. patent allows you to try to stop infringers who make, sell, offer for sale, use (all in the U.S.) or import into the U.S. For example, a Chinese or German or Argentine located company can make it and sell it world-wide, except in the U.S. no problem at all. Other patent laws around the world are similar. For a Chinese patent ...


1

Foreign firms have long complained that enforcing their intellectual property rights in China is difficult due to local judicial protectionism, challenges in obtaining evidence, small damage awards, and a perceived bias against foreign firms. . . . Local Judicial Protectionism One major complaint levied against China’s IPR regime is that ...


1

The goal of these patent clauses is two-fold: that contributors cannot create patent traps. For example: contributor A makes contributions. Using the contributions causes A's patents to be infringed. Without these clauses, A could later sue the project's users. that someone who works against the project by claiming patent infringement doesn't simultaneously ...


1

How can a US company sue a Canadian company if the Canadian company denies the request from US Company to stop selling this product. The US company can hire a lawyer and sue you and/or your company in Canadian court. Google "cross-border litigation US canada".


1

Trademarks in the US exist and are defensible without being registered. If you use the trademark in a way that will cause confusion between your product and theirs (which for identical products is inevitable) you are infringing the second company’s trademark. Because the patent has expired you can make the wallets and call them something else. Or you can ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible