|
Formstein Defence
In the context of German patent law, the ''Formstein'' defence is a well-known defense against an alleged infringement by equivalents ''Equivalents'' is a series of photographs of clouds taken by Alfred Stieglitz from 1925 to 1934. They are generally recognized as the first photographs intended to free the subject matter from literal interpretation, and, as such, are some of t ..., wherein the alleged infringer claims that the embodiment alleged to be equivalent (to the subject-matter claimed in the patent) is not patentable and therefore the doctrine of equivalents does not apply. It is similar to the UK's ''Gillette'' defense and the U.S. ''Wilson'' case. The name "''Formstein''" means "molded kerbstone" and comes from a landmark decision of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (''Bundesgerichtshof'') issued in 1986.Schneidmesser II; GRUR 1986, p 803. Federal Court of Justice of Germany, April 29, 1986. See also * Arrow declaration References {{Germany-law-stub ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
German Patent Law
German patent law is mainly governed by the ''Patents Act'' (german: Patentgesetz) and the European Patent Convention. A patent covering Germany can be obtained through four different routes: through the direct filing of a national patent application with the German Patent and Trade Mark Office (german: Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt) (direct national route), through the filing of a European patent application (European route), or through the filing of an international application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty followed by the entry into either the European phase or the national (German) phase of said international application (Euro-PCT route). The German patent has a term of 20 years. Litigation The German patent litigation system is one of the few patent systems in which the issue of patent infringement and of patent validity are dealt with by different courts. The district courts deal with infringement, whereas the Federal Patent Court (German: ''Bundespatentgericht'') i ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Patent Infringement
Patent infringement is the commission of a prohibited act with respect to a patented invention without permission from the patent holder. Permission may typically be granted in the form of a license. The definition of patent infringement may vary by jurisdiction, but it typically includes using or selling the patented invention. In many countries, a use is required to be ''commercial'' (or to have a ''commercial'' purpose) to constitute patent infringement. The scope of the patented invention or the extent of protection is defined in the claims of the granted patent. In other words, the terms of the claims inform the public of what is not allowed without the permission of the patent holder. Patents are territorial, and infringement is only possible in a country where a patent is in force. For example, if a patent is granted in the United States, then anyone in the United States is prohibited from making, using, selling or importing the patented item, while people in other co ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Doctrine Of Equivalents
The doctrine of equivalents is a legal rule in many (but not all) of the world's patent systems that allows a court to hold a party liable for patent infringement even though the infringing device or process does not fall within the literal scope of a patent claim, but nevertheless is equivalent to the claimed invention. U.S. Judge Learned Hand has described its purpose as being "to temper unsparing logic and prevent an infringer from stealing the benefit of the invention". Standards for determining equivalents Germany German courts typically apply a three-step test known as Schneidmesser's questions. These questions are: #Does the variant solve the problem underlying the invention with means that objectively have the same effect? #Would the person skilled in the art, using the common general knowledge, have realised at the priority date that the variant has the same effect? #Are the considerations which the skilled person takes into account for the variant in the light of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Claim (patent)
In a patent or patent application, the claims define, in technical terms, the extent, i.e. the scope, of the protection conferred by a patent, or the protection sought in a patent application. In other words, the purpose of the claims is to define which subject-matter is protected by the patent (or sought to be protected by the patent application). This is termed as the "notice function" of a patent claim—to warn others of what they must not do if they are to avoid infringement liability. The claims are of the utmost importance both during prosecution and litigation alike. For instance, a claim could read: * "An apparatus for catching mice, said apparatus comprising a base, a spring member coupled to the base, and ..." * "A chemical composition for cleaning windows, said composition substantially consisting of 10–15% ammonia, ..." * "Method for computing future life expectancies, said method comprising gathering data including X, Y, Z, analyzing the data, comparing the analy ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Patentable
Within the context of a national or multilateral body of law, an invention is patentable if it meets the relevant legal conditions to be granted a patent. By extension, patentability also refers to the substantive conditions that must be met for a patent to be held valid. Requirements The patent laws usually require that, for an invention to be patentable, it must be: * Patentable subject matter, i.e., a kind of subject-matter eligible for patent protection * Novel (i.e. at least some aspect of it must be new) * Non-obvious (in United States patent law) or involve an inventive step (in European patent law) * Useful (in U.S. patent law) or be susceptible of industrial application (in European patent law) Usually the term "''patentability''" only refers to "substantive" conditions, and does not refer to formal conditions such as the "sufficiency of disclosure", the "unity of invention" or the " best mode requirement". Judging patentability is one aspect of the official exami ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Gillette Defense
This is a list of legal terms relating to patents. A patent is not a right to practice or use the invention, but a territorial right to exclude others from commercially exploiting the invention, granted to an inventor or his successor in rights in exchange to a public disclosure of the invention. A Abandonment The reply of an applicant to an office action must be made within a prescribed time limit. If no reply is received within the time period, the application may be considered, depending on the jurisdiction, as abandoned or deemed to be withdrawn, and, therefore, no longer pending. Allowance A patent is "allowed" when the patent office examiners have determined that the patent application meets the necessary criteria of novelty, non-obviousness, feasibility, and usefulness. The applicants are notified of this certification, and that the patent office is ready to grant the patent once certain fees are paid and paperwork filed by the inventors or assignees. The term is used ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Federal Court Of Justice Of Germany
The Federal Court of Justice (german: Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) is the highest court in the system of ordinary jurisdiction (''ordentliche Gerichtsbarkeit'') in Germany, founded in 1950. It has its seat in Karlsruhe with two panels being situated in Leipzig since 1997 and 2020, respectively. It is the supreme court (court of last resort) in all matters of criminal law and private law. A decision handed down by the BGH can be reversed only by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany on constitutionality (compatibility with the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany) grounds. History Before the Federal Court of Justice of Germany was created in its present form, Germany had several highest courts: As early as 1495 there was the ''Reichskammergericht'', which existed until 1806. As from 1870, in the time of the North German Confederation, there was the '' Bundesoberhandelsgericht'' in Leipzig. In 1871, it was renamed to ''Reichsoberhandelsgericht'' and its area of re ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
International Review Of Intellectual Property And Competition Law
The ''International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law'' is a peer-reviewed academic journal published by Springer Science+Business Media on behalf of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition. It was established in 1970 and covers worldwide developments in intellectual property and competition law. In addition, the journal also covers decisions and leading cases from jurisdictions around the world, as well as editorials, opinions, reports, case notes, and book reviews. The editors-in-chief are Reto M. Hilty and Josef Drexl (Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition). Abstracting and indexing The journal is abstracted and indexed in: *Emerging Sources Citation Index *International Bibliography of Periodical Literature *Scopus See also *List of intellectual property law journals This list includes notable journals and magazines concerned with intellectual property (IP) law and business, and their various sub-fields, such as copyright, pate ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Arrow Declaration
In UK patent litigation, an Arrow declaration is a declaration or order sought, for reasons of legal certainty, from a court that a product (or process) to be launched was old (i.e., not novel) or obvious in patent law terms at a particular date, so that the product (or process) cannot be affected by (i.e., cannot infringe) any later granted patent, which would itself necessarily also either lack novelty or inventive step. The order is named after ''Arrow Generics Ltd. v Merck & Co Inc 007EWHC 1900 (Pat)'', in which it was originally suggested that this mechanism would be available as a declaratory relief. Such a declaration was granted for the first time in ''Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Company Ltd v Abbvie Biotechnology Ltd 017EWHC 395 (Pat), Patents Court, England, 3 March 2017''. The defense is similar to a so-called "Gillette defense", i.e. "the argument in infringement proceedings (...) that the defendant's product implements prior art technology, such that any patent wh ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
