 |
|
CONTENT SYNDICATION 
|
|
CONTENT SYNDICATION
|
|
BLOGROLL OPML:
|
|
|
|
Search in IPJUR.COM
|
BLOG@IP::JURPatent Attorney Axel H Horns' Blog on Intellectual Property Law.
Sunday, October 01, 2006Issue 03/2006 of epi-Information Now On-Line.The recent issue 03/2006 is ready for download here (PDF).This issue reprints the epi response to the  UK Patent Office Consultation on the inventive step requirement in United Kingdom patent law and practice, stressing that the reason why epi replied to this (national UK) questionnaire is that they believe that there should only be one level of inventive step throughout the EPC and/or EU states. They further conclude:"[...] As a European professional organisation we do not believe it to be appropriate to comment on specific features of UK patent practice. However, we note that only a few patent offices throughout the world examine for inventive step and that there are significant variations in the inventive level required. On a largely subjective basis, and just listing patent offices of which we have some experience, we would say the Australian and South Korean level is about the same as the British level, that the European Patent Office level is slightly higher, that the level in the Netherlands, Japan, Germany, Thailand and Taiwan is somewhat higher and that the level in Austria and Canada is somewhat lower. The level in the United States is very variable and is also judged on somewhat different criteria when two or more documents are considered as prior art. [...]"Mr. Lyndon-Stanford, in his capacity as chairman, provides a report of the European Patent Practice Committee (EPPC) Meeting of 15 June 2006, augmented by an Addendum of Mr. Leyder, Convenor of the EPC 2000 sub-group of EPPC. A report on the FICPI World Congress held in Paris May 22 to 26, 2006, is given by Mr. Johnson.Furthermore, a report on the Public Hearing on July 12th, 2006, in conjunction with the Consultation on Future Patent Policy in Europe of the European Commission is provided by Mr. Lyndon-Stanford. In the articles secition, Mr. Holzer presents his paper on effective mechanisms for challenging the validity of patents. Mr. Martin A. Bader then offers his paper under the title "Riding the Value-chain Upgrade - Patents as a Means of Boosting your Factual Protection Strategies". He concludes: "[...] As a conclusion, for enterprises that strive for sustainability it has become essential to support their factual protection strategies by legal ones, also taking into account the major current changes of where value creation is shifting to and takes place at, i. e. research and development activities on collaborative basis and support by service innovations.[...]"A paper of Mr. Boff runs under the title "Reasons to be cheerful?" and discusses aspects of patent economics: "[...] All factors lead to the supposition that unless there is a major change in the world economy, the number of patent applications filed will continue to increase. What is more uncertain is by how much, and from which countries.Mr. Steenbeek explains two new ECJ decisions on cross-border patent litigation.Finally, Mr. Jean-Michel Zilliox, Director, European Patent Academy, communicates "What's new from the European Patent Academy".Technorati Tags: Patents
| ||||||||||||||||
