|
Legal Ramifications Regarding Building a Patented DeviceThe following was written by someone who worked in the patent office, and whose close associate currently works there. Saturday, January 24, 2004 4:00 PM Here are my personal opinions, offered not as legal advice (which would be prohibited). Though here say, I did seek competent counsel in formulating my ideas. ------------------------------------------------------------------ As an aside, note that obtaining a patent does not require building a prototype or understanding any theory or principle. It does generally require sufficient information for one skilled in the art to reduce it to practice. Good patent attorneys always attempt to minimally disclose patent details in order to maximize trade secrets while satisfying the patent examiner's scrutiny. Thus, many patents can prove very hard to reproduce in the real world. Presently, the patent office has reduced the quality and size of it's examining corp. and many low-quality applications are being approved. Approval rates and quality of applications vary with economic situations. Thus, now is the time to patent things which would previously have been rejected. Unlike patents, copyrights have certain exceptions, such as fair use. Fair use exception include education, preferably where no money is exchanged and the use is limited in scope. See http://www.patent.gov.uk/patent/benefits/ FYI: http://www.softwareprotection.com/patent.html In answer to the question in this thread, the person offering his patent should assign a license to [the target party] certifying that he indeed is the exclusive patent owner and legally able to assign rights, and individually assumes any and all legal liability should this not be the case. A lawyer should prepare this statement. Signed, -- The Law Student. (-: ------------------------------------------------------------------ See also
Page posted Jan. 25, 2004 |
|
|
