½Û×ÓÊÓƵ

View the related checklists about Industrial application

University spin-offs—checklist

University spin-offs—checklist Universities undertake a significant amount of research and therefore potentially generate a lot of protectable IP. This Checklist presents issues to consider in exploiting such IP, looked at from the perspectives of different people who may be involved in the creation and subsequent use of that IP. By definition universities and other academic institutions undertake a significant amount of research and therefore generate a lot of IP rights. The protection and exploitation of IP is both expensive and time consuming and often a university is better placed to take on this role than individual academics. Larger universities often have an IP policy requiring academics to assign all IP rights arising from their research to the university. In return incentives such as a share in the revenue generated by the IP will be given. Once a university has secured ownership of IP there are various ways in which it can be commercialised. These include: • donation for the general good of the public • licensing to existing third parties...

View the related practice notes about Industrial application

Patentability and exclusions from patentability

This Practice Note introduces the requirements under the Patents Act 1977 (PA 1977) and European Patent Convention (EPC) for something to be considered patentable.What is a patent?Patents protect new inventions and may cover aspects such as how things work, what they are made of and how they are made. The rationale behind patents is that they encourage innovation by rewarding the patent owner (patentee) with up to 20 years during which they can prevent others from making, using, importing or selling the invention without permission (even if they are not deliberately infringing). For more information about what patents are and what they protect, see Practice Note: Introduction to patents.Patents are registered rights which are granted following a formal application and examination procedure. There are two types of UK patents:•UK national patents (UK patents)—these are examined and granted by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) under the provision of the PA 1977•UK designations of European patents (EP(UK) patents)—these are examined and granted by the European Patent Office (EPO) under the provision of the EPC and validated in...

Patent invalidity and revocation

This Practice Note discusses the grounds for patent invalidity and revocation under the Patents Act 1977 (PA 1977), focusing on lack of novelty (anticipation) and insufficiency. It also explains the key terminology which is relevant to patent validity considerations, such as the priority date, the person skilled in the art (or the skilled addressee) and common general knowledge (CGK).The rationale behind patents, which protect new inventions, is that they encourage innovation because they reward the patent owner with 20 or more years during which they can prevent others from infringing their patents, that is, making, using, importing or selling the invention without permission. For more information, see Practice Note: Patent infringement.A patent is granted following a formal application and registration procedure. During this process (which is referred to as patent prosecution), the patent application is examined by a patent examiner at the relevant intellectual property office (eg the UK Intellectual Property Office and European Patent Office (EPO)) to check whether the invention claimed is patentable (ie satisfies the patentability criteria)...

View the related q&as about Industrial application

What are the key practical issues for a business to consider when exploiting its intellectual property rights?

What are the key practical issues for a business to consider when exploiting its intellectual property rights? What IP rights are there? Most businesses will be familiar with the main IP rights of trade marks, patents, design rights and copyright. However, many businesses will also have database rights, trade secrets and confidential information: • trade mark—A trade mark is a sign used to distinguish the goods and services of one undertaking from those of another. A brand name, design, or logo that a business trades under, to market its goods and services, may be registrable as a trade mark. A trade mark owner acquires the exclusive right to use the trade mark for the goods and services for which it is registered. Among other things, marks which are descriptive, or which are customary in the trade, cannot be registered. A registered trade mark can potentially be renewed indefinitely. For more information, see Practice Note: Introduction to trade marks • patent—A technical invention which is new, involves an inventive...

Why register intellectual property?

Why register intellectual property? Clarification of existence and ownership of IP rights Intellectual property rights are monopoly rights. The exclusive ownership or use of a brand name, logo, design or invention can give rise to competitive advantages and revenue. Many unregistered IP rights (such as the right to sue for passing off) are not easy to establish or their ownership may be unclear.  As a result, they are hard to exploit and their value is diminished. Registration of IP rights provides definitive proof of the existence of an IP right and who owns it (at least until the registration expires or is challenged). Registered IP rights also benefit from wider legal protection than unregistered rights. However, the benefits need to be balanced against the costs (eg of professional advisers and official fees) of registration, especially if IP rights are to be registered in multiple jurisdictions. Exclusive right to use trade marks and logos The registration of a trade mark gives the owner the...

View the related News about Industrial application

AI machines cannot be inventors under the UK Patents Act (Thaler v Comptroller-General)

IP analysis: This appeal to the Supreme Court concerned two UK patent applications filed by the appellant Dr Thaler. Dr Thaler had listed an artificial intelligence (AI) machine he owned called DABUS as the inventor when making the patent applications. The court was asked to determine three principal issues: (i) does the term ‘inventor’ for the purposes of the Patents Act 1977 (PA 1977) extend to AI machines; (ii) will the owner of an AI machine be the owner of any invention devised by it; and (iii) was the Hearing Officer for the Comptroller entitled to hold that the two patent applications would be taken to be withdrawn. The Supreme Court held, dismissing the appeal, that DABUS was not an inventor for the purposes of PA 1977, ss 7 and 13 and Dr Thaler did not derive the right to secure the grant of the patents to himself by reason of his ownership of DABUS. Accordingly, the Comptroller was right to find that the applications were deemed to be withdrawn...

Irish Supreme Court asks Court of Justice for guidance on drug patent

Law360, London: The Supreme Court of Ireland has asked the Court of Justice for guidance on a patent dispute over a cholesterol drug that has ended in differing results in many of the EU's Member States.