I feel their pain: with science data we have to be very careful about the sequence of our public pronouncements, publications and patent filings. Tech Transfer (our university patent and licensing department) get's antsy when we head out to meetings.
Ummm the prior art as it were was by Apple. So that really makes zero sense
I am sorry Apple you lose your accusation of patent violation because Apple did it before you.
So if you do something before you do it then everyone else can copy it and their defense for ripping you off is to claim that you didn't tell us we couldn't until after we already did.
I wonder how many EU companies, German in particular, have publicly available presentations that predate the filing dates of their patents. It would be nice to go down the list and invalidate a huge swath of tech patents across several of their key industries, like automotive, industrial, pharmaceutical, software, etc. Mercedes, SAP and Bayer could use a good reality check.
You are. He showed it before the patent was filed.
I would think they had a "patent pending" which allows 12 months prior to filing a full patent. This time is to allow you to show your work and stay protected*.
*which it only does for the big boys. The little guy gets hosed as the big companies know if they all tell you no, you won't file for the full patent (which cost $10,000 + vs. the pending which is only $300ish) so they wait you out.
Makes sense to have to file for the patent prior to showing or releasing a product. However, when patents are filed and granted, they get released for viewing, thus eliminating the secrecy that Apple so loves to have.
However it does mean you cant lead people into a situation where you've done a public demo, they've checked for any patent applications before copying, they then make there own version only to be subject to a patent at a later date.
This makes it a lot clearer - thanks.
I guess the next question I have (without knowing the case more than reading the article):
Is the feature that was demo'd copied between the SteveJobs demo and patent application (when it would be fair to say they could've copied it because they couldn't find any copyrights), or after it was applied for when it wouldn't be so fair.
Even then, was the Patent copied and produced in Europe; or copied in Asia for example, and sold in Europe (as I would guess the case would be).
And I guess that leads me to think that the patent obviously relates to the sale of an item, and not the production of it in the region the patent is granted?
I guess the next question I have (without knowing the case more than reading the article):
Is the feature that was demo'd copied between the SteveJobs demo and patent application (when it would be fair to say they could've copied it because they couldn't find any copyrights), or after it was applied for when it wouldn't be so fair.
Even then, was the Patent copied and produced in Europe; or copied in Asia for example, and sold in Europe (as I would guess the case would be).
And I guess that leads me to think that the patent obviously relates to the sale of an item, and not the production of it in the region the patent is granted?
Patent means that in that region, competitors can neither produce or sale an infringing item. It is a state granted monopoly so it is absolutely normal that the rules of disclosure are so stringent.
But the important point here is that Apple would have been ok if they had linked the EU patent to the original US one. In that case the EU patent is an extension of the US one and the US rules apply. They probably did not so because having separate patents gives you added protection against invalidation. More, of all juridictions available in EU, they choose to battle Samsung in Germany where, while courts are speedy, the threshold for infringement is probably higher than say in Netherland of France. EU rules means that you can fight a particular point in one country at a time.
I would think they had a "patent pending" which allows 12 months prior to filing a full patent. This time is to allow you to show your work and stay protected*.
*which it only does for the big boys. The little guy gets hosed as the big companies know if they all tell you no, you won't file for the full patent (which cost $10,000 + vs. the pending which is only $300ish) so they wait you out.
That is only true in the U.S. As the article states, you have no grace period in Europe. As soon as you publicly display a technology, your ability to patent it is gone.
That is only true in the U.S. As the article states, you have no grace period in Europe. As soon as you publicly display a technology, your ability to patent it is gone.
Then how does the European patent office work? You file once for a full patent?
Also, if prior art is a reason to null and void a patent, why would it not also be reason enough to show you were first to the idea and thus have some rights to it?
And there are a number of people in NZ that would be happy to get rid of that particular fat German
I'm failing to see what obesity has got to do with this. And place of birth. Besides, after being on the 'wrong side' of copyright he now is actually all for the protection of copyright. How is that wrong?
I'm failing to see what obesity has got to do with this. And place of birth. Besides, after being on the 'wrong side' of copyright he now is actually all for the protection of copyright. How is that wrong?
Here in NZ we generally tend to be a more reserved bunch of people - showboating and excessive displays of wealth don't tend to sit as comfortably.
Being a big boy from overseas probably isn't the real issue here, although I guess like many places obesity along with wealth can bring to mind someone living a life of excess...
Some like him too though.
I don't personally hold any strong opinions about him.
I actually do. I think he looks, well, the word repulsive comes to mind, but English is not my native language, so I may be overstating it here.
I was actually wandering why jfanning doesn't like him.
Still, thanks for posting.
He is waste of tax payers money (partly due to him, and partly due to the NZ Police, FBI cock up). Also, we recently had another case in NZ in which a SA emigrant was going to be refused residence due to his weight, Kim was significantly larger that the SA gentleman, but due to him having a free dollars in the bank is allowed in with welcome arms
He is waste of tax payers money (partly due to him, and partly due to the NZ Police, FBI cock up). Also, we recently had another case in NZ in which a SA emigrant was going to be refused residence due to his weight, Kim was significantly larger that the SA gentleman, but due to him having a free dollars in the bank is allowed in with welcome arms
Ah, ok, thanks for this. True, should be treated equally.
Comments
Wow, a link to a website called "Rectangles and Rounded Corners". Classy.
I feel their pain: with science data we have to be very careful about the sequence of our public pronouncements, publications and patent filings. Tech Transfer (our university patent and licensing department) get's antsy when we head out to meetings.
Ummm the prior art as it were was by Apple. So that really makes zero sense
I am sorry Apple you lose your accusation of patent violation because Apple did it before you.
So if you do something before you do it then everyone else can copy it and their defense for ripping you off is to claim that you didn't tell us we couldn't until after we already did.
That clears it up.
…why don’t you tell me what you think is wrong with my statement?
Below:
Not YOUR statement; the statement being made.
You are. He showed it before the patent was filed.
I would think they had a "patent pending" which allows 12 months prior to filing a full patent. This time is to allow you to show your work and stay protected*.
*which it only does for the big boys. The little guy gets hosed as the big companies know if they all tell you no, you won't file for the full patent (which cost $10,000 + vs. the pending which is only $300ish) so they wait you out.
Makes sense to have to file for the patent prior to showing or releasing a product. However, when patents are filed and granted, they get released for viewing, thus eliminating the secrecy that Apple so loves to have.
You may have messed up your geography there. And there are a number of people in NZ that would be happy to get rid of that particular fat German
Hi, you don't seem to appreciate my expert advance here?
Oops, hang on - I wasn't giving any - just trying to understand something that didn't make sense to me.
Some good replies are helping a lot.
Unfortunately this reply is not one of the helpful replies.
Apologies for annoying you.
This makes it a lot clearer - thanks.
I guess the next question I have (without knowing the case more than reading the article):
Is the feature that was demo'd copied between the SteveJobs demo and patent application (when it would be fair to say they could've copied it because they couldn't find any copyrights), or after it was applied for when it wouldn't be so fair.
Even then, was the Patent copied and produced in Europe; or copied in Asia for example, and sold in Europe (as I would guess the case would be).
And I guess that leads me to think that the patent obviously relates to the sale of an item, and not the production of it in the region the patent is granted?
This makes it a lot clearer - thanks.
I guess the next question I have (without knowing the case more than reading the article):
Is the feature that was demo'd copied between the SteveJobs demo and patent application (when it would be fair to say they could've copied it because they couldn't find any copyrights), or after it was applied for when it wouldn't be so fair.
Even then, was the Patent copied and produced in Europe; or copied in Asia for example, and sold in Europe (as I would guess the case would be).
And I guess that leads me to think that the patent obviously relates to the sale of an item, and not the production of it in the region the patent is granted?
Patent means that in that region, competitors can neither produce or sale an infringing item. It is a state granted monopoly so it is absolutely normal that the rules of disclosure are so stringent.
But the important point here is that Apple would have been ok if they had linked the EU patent to the original US one. In that case the EU patent is an extension of the US one and the US rules apply. They probably did not so because having separate patents gives you added protection against invalidation. More, of all juridictions available in EU, they choose to battle Samsung in Germany where, while courts are speedy, the threshold for infringement is probably higher than say in Netherland of France. EU rules means that you can fight a particular point in one country at a time.
That is only true in the U.S. As the article states, you have no grace period in Europe. As soon as you publicly display a technology, your ability to patent it is gone.
That is only true in the U.S. As the article states, you have no grace period in Europe. As soon as you publicly display a technology, your ability to patent it is gone.
Then how does the European patent office work? You file once for a full patent?
Also, if prior art is a reason to null and void a patent, why would it not also be reason enough to show you were first to the idea and thus have some rights to it?
This all seems like logic black hole to me.
I'm failing to see what obesity has got to do with this. And place of birth. Besides, after being on the 'wrong side' of copyright he now is actually all for the protection of copyright. How is that wrong?
Here in NZ we generally tend to be a more reserved bunch of people - showboating and excessive displays of wealth don't tend to sit as comfortably.
Being a big boy from overseas probably isn't the real issue here, although I guess like many places obesity along with wealth can bring to mind someone living a life of excess...
Some like him too though.
I don't personally hold any strong opinions about him.
I actually do. I think he looks, well, the word repulsive comes to mind, but English is not my native language, so I may be overstating it here.
I was actually wandering why jfanning doesn't like him.
Still, thanks for posting.
He is waste of tax payers money (partly due to him, and partly due to the NZ Police, FBI cock up). Also, we recently had another case in NZ in which a SA emigrant was going to be refused residence due to his weight, Kim was significantly larger that the SA gentleman, but due to him having a free dollars in the bank is allowed in with welcome arms
Ah, ok, thanks for this. True, should be treated equally.