Patent Protection For Inventions Research Articles

Тенденции патентования и некоторые особенности перевода патентов в микроэлектронике

Patent protection of inventions is an essential component of any high-tech industry. Microelectronics is one of the most rapidly developing industries with a very short lifecycle of its products. In addition to legal information defining the rights of the patent holder, a patent contains full technical information describing the invention essence. Translation of a patent involves certain difficulties both because of the information presentation style specific to this kind of document and the responsibility placed on the translator in connection with the possibility of incorrectly interpreting the invention idea, as a result of which the developer may become misinformed. The article discusses the main translation difficulties stemming from ambiguity of words and frequent use of general scientific words by the researchers to expand their own rights. Special attention is paid to the interconnection between scientific-technical and patent terminologies. It is noted that referring to patent search systems using the IPC is the most effective and prompt way to search for the most accurate interpretation of terms and expressions in making translation. To determine the specific features of translation, a detailed patent structure is given, each paragraph in which is characterized by its own lexical and grammatical features. A claim is considered in detail, because it is exactly this part of the patent that determines the scope of exclusive rights. The main legal meaning of a patent relates to the claim and is a combination of essential features, each of which is necessary and sufficient for a technical result, the achievement of which the patented invention is directed to. The availability of both the European (German) and the American claim construction models is noted. They differ from each other cardinally both in syntax and in presentation logic. Translation difficulties are analyzed. A conclusion is drawn that in translating all sources representing the essence of the patented solution, it is necessary to keep the unity of the terminology to avoid, in the final result, any ambiguity in interpreting the already known solutions and the new technical solution that is subject to patenting. Free interpretation of the invention description context is unacceptable.

Primer on Patentability and Use of Ideas Developed by Contractors Performing Work for State and Federal Transportation and Local Planning Agencies

The U.S. patent system has a number of implications for federal, state, and local departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies. For example, contractors who develop inventions with the use of federal funds are typically allowed to patent the inventions, but the federal government retains a license to use the invention, or to have another contractor use the patented invention on behalf of the federal government. This statutory framework allows federal transportation agencies to directly fund an invention, and then later hire different contractors to use or improve the invention, without paying royalties to the original contractor, who may have patented the invention. Furthermore, even when the federal government does not own a license to a particular invention, the federal government can authorize its contractors to use patented inventions, and the patent owner’s only remedy is to seek a reasonable royalty in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, as the federal contractor is immunized from infringement claims. Different schemes apply to state and local DOTs, which may be authorized to obtain patent protection for inventions developed by their contractors or employees. Where federal grant funds are used in the performance of a state or local contract, the federal scheme probably applies — granting patent rights to the contractor and a nontransferable license to the federal government. However, there are unique considerations when an invention is made on a federally funded state DOT contract, because it is the state DOT (rather than the federal funding agency) who has contracted with the inventor, and the contracting state DOT may be more likely than the federal funding agency to need a license for its other contractors to use or improve the invention on behalf of the state DOT. The fact that the federal government obtains a license to use an invention does not mean that the invention can be used royalty-free on future federally funded projects by the state DOT whose contractor invented it, or by other state DOTs. Furthermore, unlike federal transportation agencies, state and local DOTs do not have the ability to authorize infringing use by their contractors. As a result, contractors for state DOTs are vulnerable to infringement lawsuits by patent owners, even as the state DOT itself is immune from suit. This article summarizes these and other patent law topics as they apply to federal, state, and local transportation agencies.

A-Z of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an international treaty administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and offers patent applicants an advantageous route for obtaining patent protection internationally.Since entering into force in 1978, the PCT has served as an alternative to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883) for acquiring patent rights in different countries. The principal objective of the PCT is, by simplification leading to more effectiveness and economy, to improve on the interests of the users of the patent system and the Offices which have responsibility for administering the previously established means of applying in several countries for patent protection for inventions. The progress of the PCT demonstrates the certainty that many more countries, developing as well as developed, will become party to the PCT in the years ahead and that its use, evidenced by the number of applications filed, will continue to increase significantly. Statistical indications of this success can be found in this document.

Problems of Patent Protection in Poland

In modern economy the effective intellectual property management has huge influence on the competitiveness and commercial success of the enterprise. Patents granted favour keeping the competitive advantage, improving reputation of the firm and rising its market value. In Poland the awareness of advantages concerning patent protection of inventions is very low. Polish firms make few applications, while small and medium size enterprises make such applications hardly ever. Therefore the large-scale activities aiming at enlarging the entrepreneurs’ knowledge concerning the possibilities to obtain the legal protection for their innovative solutions are necessary. All significant procedural barriers that occur in the process of gaining and claiming protection rights should be also eliminated, with the most irritating one which is too long time for examining the cases by courts and adjudicating possible disputes. The aim of the article is to highlight the most important problems that one has to face if one wants to grant and enforce the patent protection in Poland. Particularly the arguments for and against patenting inventions are presented, requirements that patented invention has to fulfil, problems to claim already existing protection and reasons to patent inventions abroad.

Patent protection for software in Israel

At first glance, US and Israeli law would appear to permit patent protection for all inventions that involve processes, including those involving software. Certainly, other technical processes or procedures, such as chemical or mechanical processes, have been eligible for patent protection in the US and Israel. US patent law states that whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, may obtain a patent therefor. Israeli patent law states that an invention, whether a product or process, which is new, useful, and useable in industry or agriculture and includes an inventive step is a patentable invention. However, in Israel and the US, software and software-related inventions have traditionally been viewed as ineligible for patent protection because of software's resemblance to human thought processes. This has been based primarily on the desire to avoid placing legal restrictions on truly mental processes, such as mathematics. Since the early 1980s, though, US courts and the US Patent and Trademark Office have taken a new approach by favoring patent protection for software-related inventions. The Israeli patent Registrar, however, seems to be wavering between the old and new approaches.