5
When you provide a license you are giving someone particular rights to something you own. First you need to own something before you have anything to licence to others. In the context of your question you are licensing your copyright. Copyright is automatic as soon as someone writes or draws something original. It only covers that particular "expression" and ...
5
Making and offering for sale are also on the list of things one can't do. Designing is ok but testing prototypes might be making and using. If the patent owner is agreeable you could negotiate a non-exclusive license for a single payment fixed amount to make and use but not to offer for sale or sell (until it expired). Or a license (exclusive or not ...
4
Good Question Gabmon. You asked about quick protection for your app prior to release.
My answer here focuses on legal questions. Successful protection of software often relies on both legal rights and practical steps. I lock the door of my house even though the law says I don't need to and someone trespassing could be jailed. In the same way, you may be ...
3
Here's something for you to consider: 35 U.S.C. 102.
Under 102(a), you cannot obtain a patent if the claimed invention was "patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date."
There are several exceptions to this rule, however. One of them is 102(b)(1), which ...
3
The effects of granted patents (including European patents) in Germany are defined in the Patentgesetz. Relevant for your question is probably §11.1, according to which non-commercial activities in the private area are not affected by patent protection. In any case, according to §9, patents only concern activities such as the production, sale or use of a ...
3
This is a multi-layered question.
1) An inventor who fully assigns his patent rights to someone else (such as his employer) generally does not have any right to practice the invention. Now, you could have contracted for a license-back, but I suspect that you did not. In addition, you should remember that patents expire early because companies decide not ...
3
A patent grants you a negative right. That is, it gives you the ability to stop other people from doing something, not to do it yourself.
There are a few times when that's relevant, like if you invent a new way of unlocking car doors, you aren't then allowed to steal cars, or as in your case, if you invent something that improves on something else, you aren'...
3
If they use your patented invention, they need to obtain a license from you. If you want to use their improvement, you would need to obtain a license from them.
3
No,
There is no requirement for a company to make public what patents they have licensed or even what patents are assigned to them. Marking a product with a patent number is optional and provides some enhanced enforcement options to the benefit of the manufacturer.
There has been discussion that the ownership of patents should be more transparent. The USPTO ...
2
Probably not, but it depends on the law of the country in which you worked. In many places, the invention belongs by law to the employer. It also depends on whether the invention is covered in your current country. I suggest you obtain professional advice before taking any actions.
2
Patents are subject to RAND/FRAND commitments if the patent holder is part of a standards-development organization (SDO) that imposes this requirement on its participants. Such SDOs are typically voluntary membership organizations that any interested party can join, so long as they agree to the SDO's policies (including its FRAND policy).
A FRAND ...
2
A US court (sorry not knowledgeable about EU antitrust) may impose (F)RAND licensing if the holder of the patent typically licenses the patents under a (F)RAND scheme but blows the ND (non-discriminatory) part .
For example, if Phillips typically licenses all its DVD patents under (F)RAND terms to DVD reader manufacturers, but then suddenly decides to ...
2
This bit of new legislation purports to amend Section 285 to allow an accused infringer to file a motion (A) limiting discovery and more importantly, (B) forcing the patentee to pay costs and attorneys' fees if it loses on the issue of infringement or validity.
As part of this proposed rule, the moving party can request that the patentee be required to post ...
2
After you do some homework call up the inventor/owner. You can look up the owner (assignee) from the google/patents page for the patent. If there is nothing in the assignment database, then the inventors are probably the owners. By looking in Public PAIR at the USPTO you can see the inventor's address and the current official correspondence address. I would ...
2
Just to be clear - patents can not infringe patents. Products being made, sold used, or imported can infringe patents.
2
I think you are asking what kind of patent application do you need. The full name of a provisional patent application is a provisional utility application. Besides utility patents there are design patents that protect the appearance of a product, not the function. "Patent Pending" means there is some patent application of some type on file.
It can take ...
2
Here is how to check on the status of a US Patent:
The first place to look is Google Patents: US4132029
The second place to look is the Public Pair system at USPTO.
The subject patent US4132029 was issued Jan 2, 1979:
From Public Pair you can also see that the patent was issued on Jan 2, 1979.
For older applications (filed prior to Jun 8, 1995), the term ...
2
It's all about the claims. If all of the claims require an A, a B and a specific lock design C and you build an X a Y and a C you haven't made something that falls within the words of the claim. But if one of the claims only includes the lock then you can't make that lock.
2
You can't file a patent if you aren't the inventor. So you don't have to worry about somebody else who didn't write the software, who sees the software and then tries to file a patent for some algorithm in the software. That would be patent fraud.
2
I'm a scientist at Twist.
The easiest way to access RPA is to buy a kit. It's quite involved to make the reactions from scratch so it's not trivial to DIY. There are lots of proteins, not all of which are commercially available individually (and certainly not economically).
The terms of supply are available online, but Section 6.4 is the relevant one, ...
2
It is common in patents to find a new way to solve an old problem. I have no specific knowledge in chain lubrication techniques so I can't comment on whether this patent is novel. However, looking at the patent, there are ten patent citations reviewed by the examiner dating back to 1904. The examiner must have found the specific implementation as described ...
2
There is no central database that lists licensing rights. Since those are private contracts between parties, there is no obligation to make the knowledge public, and many times it is deliberately confidential. You can search SEC (or foreign equivalent) filings, Press Releases, and markings on a product in a catalog, but it will only be made public if there's ...
2
Once you own a patent, you own the right to stop whomever you'd like from practicing what it describes. It's yours as much as your car or computer is, for its term.
As such, no, there's no real maximum that someone could charge. Of course, as is the case with capitalism, there may be limits on what people will pay, but that's the biggest consideration.
As ...
2
Essentially you would be giving away very narrow licenses. This would only "weaken" your patent inside the scope of these licenses.
But another point to consider is that you will be creating prior art for further improvements which you might not be able to patent afterwards.
And people might copy your invention for personal use even though infringing your ...
2
A patent license is a contract between two parties, a licensor who owns a patent right and a licensee who wants to practice what the patent claims. If the licensee is a business, it is possible but would be uncommon to pay for a license without knowing what patents it covers. Contracts with businesses are not usually published, so it would be uncommon for ...
1
Of course those patents would have expired long ago. Only activities carried out while a patent is in-force would be susceptible to royalties and there is a statute of limitations on asserting those claims. Someone citing his patents and even patenting things that build on his work would not entitle him to compensation. Only making, selling, offering for ...
1
To clarify, there is not usually any reason to wait until you actually get a patent (might take 3 years). But it may be important to wait until you have applied for a patent, assuming something about your product is new and non- obvious. The part of the law quoted in another answer is wording that has only been in effect for about a month. You might keep ...
1
Unless it has a specific copyright notice, patent images are in the public domain.
See Are text and images in the patent copyrighted?
1
Can I file that patent?
Query answer is subjective in nature, You have to check if combination of known elements yields more than just predictable results. In other words if your solution to new problem was achieveable by prior art.
As per MPEP:2143 Examples of Basic Requirements of a Prima Facie Case of Obviousness
Exemplary rationales that may ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
