IPcopy writers
ipcopy
ipcopyamelia
ipcopyaz
ipcopyben
ipcopydev
ipcopyeleni
ipcopyemily
ipcopymanuela
ipcopymark
ipcopyrichKeltie LLP
K2 IP Limited
Is it worth suing? – a gambler’s perspective
In a previous post (“Before you sue …” of 29 April 2014), I considered the business and other relationships that might rationally inhibit your client from suing for patent infringement, or even making any approach to the infringer. Now suppose that the client is in fact not so inhibited (and assume also, as in the previous post, that he is not a PAE = patent assertion entity = NPE = non-practising entity = patent troll). Should legal costs deter your client from suing? In (for instance) big pharma disputes, both the significance of the infringement and the financial resources of the patent owners are usually such that legal costs are ultimately not a deterrent to litigation. But if the scale of infringement is moderate – with the client expecting if he wins to gain lowish millions in damages and future royalties – legal costs need careful consideration before litigation is begun. (more…)
IPcopy’s Top 10 Posts from 2014
It’s nearly the end of 2014 which means that, along with the rest of the World+dog, it’s time to wheel out an End-of-Year ListTM of some description.
So here, in reverse order to try and build a modicum of excitement, are our Top 10 most read posts from 2014.
10. Unpacking the Trunki Judgement: Designs and Copyright with Magmatic vs PMS International
In at number 10 is a post from 2013 relating to the Trunki case in the High Court. Things have moved on now and we’ve had a Court of Appeal decision (see here) and more recently still the Supreme Court has given permission to appeal the Court of Appeal decision. Full details regarding the Supreme Court appeal can be found here but the “legal issue in this case relates to the significance attached to the fact that a graphical representation of a Community Registered Design shows no surface decoration”. (more…)
Unitary patent: News Nuggets (December 2014)
It’s very nearly Christmas but just before we all go off to stuff ourselves with turkey and overdo it slightly on the eggnog, here’s a quick update on some unitary patent news including a possible venue for the UPC in the UK. (more…)
Notes from an EPO video-conference
For several years now, it has been possible to attend Oral Proceedings with the Examination Division of the European Patent Office by video-conference. Despite this extended availability, this ipcopywriter found that there was surprisingly little information online about how these are carried out, and so provides an account of a recent experience below. (more…)
USPTO Guidance on Subject Matter Eligibility
The USPTO has issued Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility for US Examiners determining eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 in view of the recent decisions in Alice, Myriad and Mayo. The guidance is interim in nature only and the USPTO expects to update it in response to feedback. Comments may be submitted to the USPTO until 16 March 2015. (more…)
The Unitary Patent Package: Two years on. Where are we now? (Overview of the Court)
Back in December 2012 it was announced, in an historic agreement, that the European Parliament had adopted two regulations relating to the creation of the unitary patent. A third element of the unitary patent package, the agreement on the unified patent court, was signed in February 2013 and the EPO expected the first unitary patent to roll off the production line in Spring 2014. It’s now nearly the end of 2014 and we’ve not met the original, highly ambitious implementation date but there has been significant progress in delivering the new system.
Starting this week IPcopy is taking a look (in traditional IPcopy Q&A styleTM) at what the unitary patent package is and where we are. Unbelievably we’ve never really covered the actual structure of the new Unified Patent Court and so here, as your starter for 10, is an overview of the UPC itself. (more…)
Keltie is Moving Office!
No.1 London Bridge
Keltie LLP is pleased to announce that we will be moving to a new office on 22 December. For the first time in our history we’ll be heading “South of the River” and will be located at No. 1 London Bridge overlooking the Thames and HMS Belfast in one direction and the London Bridge redevelopment and the Shard in the other direction. (more…)
Licences and Assignments of Unitary Patents and the Relevance of German Law
The law governing licences and assignments of future European patents with unitary effect (unitary patents) is determined by a residency/place of business test for applicants based in the states of the EU participating in enhanced cooperation (member states); German law will apply to licences and assignments for other applicants. This may sound esoteric, but will in fact be of practical significance to many UK-based practitioners, because many large corporations based outside the member states file all their patents in their own name, including for inventions devised by UK-based affiliates. (more…)
Unitary Patent Package – The Ratification Game (Malta Ratifies the UPC Agreement)
Update (10 December 2014)
According to the website of the Council of the European Union, Malta deposited its instrument of ratification on 9 December 2014 to become the sixth country to complete its ratification formalities. Malta joins Denmark, Belgium, Sweden, France and Austria as one of the six countries who have completed their ratification processes.
Now that Malta has joined the “ratification” group it means that the “Malta Problem”, which is discussed in depth here, will kick in once the unitary patent system is up and running. In a nutshell, no European patent application filed before 1 March 2007, and which is still pending, will be eligible to become a unitary patent (assuming it grants after the unitary patent system goes live).
Recent unitary patent themed seminars have given the impression that additional UPC ratifications in 2014 were unexpected so this news is something of a surprise. However, we had heard suggestions back in January this year that Malta might have ratified. If the news story we picked up on earlier in the year was correct then presumably Malta delayed depositing its instrument of ratification for nearly a year for some reason.
IPcopy’s ratification infographic has been updated to reflect the news from Malta (for an answer to the question “What’s up with this infographic?“, please see the bottom of the post!”).
Unitary Patent: News Nuggets (ERA Conference – December 2014)
On 4th and 5th December IPcopy attended the ERA conference “Preparing for the Unitary Patent Package” at the Old Hall in Lincoln’s Inn*.
The latest progress and developments relating to the implementation of the Unitary Patent Package (UPP) were on the menu and the conference included a distinguished group of speakers, many of whom are involved directly in the implementation process. We’ll try and post some more in depth comment in the next week or so on a couple of the talks/subjects discussed but in the meantime here’s some nuggets of news…. (more…)
Subscribe to RSS feed
IPcopy 