Mindmap
Patents [PA]

Mind map: Patents law
Inhalt der Mindmap
Patents [PA]
(1) Monopoly right to use and exploit the invention for industrial use
- Must be either a product or process
(2) Criteria for registration [s. 1]
- (i) Novelty - New product/process not already state of the art known to the public at the date of application [s. 2(1)]
- State of the art: already available to the public [s. 2(2)]
- Use in public defeats novelty as state of the art [Windsurfing v Tabur]
- If anticipated in the state of the art, i.e. disclosed to someone sufficiently skilled, this is an enabling disclosure - which defeats novelty (use, sale, exhibition, etc.)
- Disclosure is disregarded if the details were obtained unlawfully (e.g. breach of confidentiality) and if the inventor applies for a patent within 6 months [s. 2(4)]
- If no patent application is made in this time, novelty is defeated
- Disclosure is disregarded if the details were obtained unlawfully (e.g. breach of confidentiality) and if the inventor applies for a patent within 6 months [s. 2(4)]
- State of the art: already available to the public [s. 2(2)]
- (ii) Inventive step - Must involve a step not obvious to a person skilled in the art [s. 3]
- Otherwise not patentable and can be revoked [s. 72(1)(a)]
- Pozzoli test:
- Identify person skilled in the art
- Identify the inventive concept
- Identify differences between state of art and inventive step
- Identify whether the differences are something someone skilled in state of the art would know
- (iii) Industrial application [s. 4]
- (iv) Not excluded [s. 1(1)(d)] [s. 1(2)] [s. 1(3)]
- (i) Novelty - New product/process not already state of the art known to the public at the date of application [s. 2(1)]
(3) Application & Duration
- (i) Sufficiency (requirements for sufficient application) [s. 14(5)] [s. 14(3)] [s. 72(1)(c)]
- Must contain a description, giving details of prior art
- Must contain enabling specification (and possibly a drawing), teaching user how to put invention into practice
- Must provide claims defining scope of the right
- (ii) Duration
- Maximum of 20 years from date of application
- Must be renewed after 4 years [s. 25(1)]
- Annual fees are payable after 4 years 3 months after each anniversary of the date of grant
- (i) Sufficiency (requirements for sufficient application) [s. 14(5)] [s. 14(3)] [s. 72(1)(c)]
(4) Ownership & Licensing
- (i) First owner is usually inventor [s. 7]
- (ii) If developed in normal course of employee's duties, owner is employer [s. 39] - exceptions [s. 39(2)] [s. 42(2)]
- But employed inventors of valuable works of outstanding benefit have right to compensation [s. 40]
- (iii) Patents are personal property so can be licensed/assigned/mortgaged [s. 30(1)] [s. 30(2)]
- Assignment/mortgage must be in writing signed by both parties and registered at IPO [s. 30(6)]
- Court may grant compulsory license to prevent owner letting invention going to waste by not using it - can only be applied for 3 years after grant of patent [s. 48]
(5) Infringement
- (i) Validity/Ownership
- Has patent come into existence (check date of patent/expiry, renewal fees paid and name on register) [s. 25]
- (ii) Infringing act
- Direct infringement [s. 60(1)]
- Making, disposing, importing, keeping product [s. 60(1)(a)]
- Using process, where infringer knows or reasonably should know that this is an infringement [s. 60(1)(b)]
- Disposing, using or importing the product obtained by using the process [s. 60(1)(c)]
- Indirect infringement [s. 60(2)]
- Supplying the means by which another can infringe, where the supplier knows or reasonably should have known the means were sufficient for putting the invention into effect in UK
- Direct infringement [s. 60(1)]
- (iii) Comparison
- Check infringing act comes within scope of patent
- Patent is construed as what a person skilled in the art would understand the patent to mean
- Wording should be wide enough to capture variants but not so wide that it can be challenged for novelty
- Scope determined by drawings and description, but take a purposive approach - combine literal meaning with essence of invention [A69 European Patent Convention] [s. 125(1)]
- Interpretation aims to provide fair protection for patentee and reasonable degree of certainty for third parties [Protocol for Interpretation of A69]
- (i) Validity/Ownership
(6) Defences
- Outside scope of patent
- Done for non-commercial purposes [s. 60(5)]
- Use began before priority date [s. 64]
- Patent is invalid (revocation) [s. 72/74] - revoked if
- Doesn't satisfy grounds (inventive step, novelty, etc.)
- Was granted to wrong owner
- Specification is insufficiently clear
- Was amended without permission
(7) Remedies
- Injunction, delivery up, declaration of validity of patent
- Damages and account of profits [s. 61(2)]
- If infringed innocently (not reasonably aware patent existed) damages not available [s. 62(1)]
- Post-expiry injunction [Dyson v Hoover]
- D gained commercial advantage by infringing patent (by developing product) whilst in effect, so should not be able to benefit from marketing product immediately on expiry of patent - therefore post-expiry injunction granted
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- LPC CLIP Mindmap am Patents [PA], erstellt von jc94055z am 11/08/2015.
- Erstellt von
- jc94055z
- Aufrufe
- 31
- Bewertung