This is outrageous. Demo your own invention, then patent it and have it invalidated because you demoed it prior to patenting it.
That is the rule everywhere in the world, except in the USA. The USA use a 1 year grace period and allowed for submarine patents which is nasty because it is used by patent trolls a lot.
More, it seems that Apple filed a separate EU patent rather than an extension of the US patent from what I gather. This is why they are in trouble, as filing an extension to the US patent would not have bumped in the early disclosure rule. But the EU patent could have been then invalidated if the USA patent had been.
Well, while I agree that this is bad luck for Apple, it seems to me like a pretty clear and fundamental principle of German patent law (i.e. apply for patent before public disclosure) ... to dismiss it as a technicality is a bit much (but I know what you meant). It's not clear the court had any other choice in its decision, given that's the law. Apple has been a multinational for years, and should really know the rules of the game outside of the US.
I always thought the "prior art" thing was when the other side could show that [B]someone else[/B] showed the same patent/idea prior to being patented.
Re-reading the article above, it does kinda give me the idea we're not getting the full story.
Near the end, it says the patent was invalidated by two other companies prior art.
Is that talking about a different patent or case?
Or has the Steve Jobs video bit been over emphasised?
So you can't show your invent before filing patent. Not reasonable in my thought.
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.
"Here's one way to think about it: Does it seem fair for a company to show you some cool ideas and then, retro-actively, go back and tell you that some of them are patented and need to be licensed? I don't think that's very fair."
Yes, very true, but if you file a patent, attain it, and release a product with said invention before anyone else I think the logic of prior art against yourself should fall away. But your point above is valid. The German system makes more sense.
Well at least the law is clear in this case it's not as if someone could file a patent for some vague idea without any details on just how it would be implemented either in silicon, or in code, or in an actual user interface and then sit back for years and wait until someone independently comes up with an actual implementation of an idea that sort of resembles the patent and then sue the maker of an actual thing which is kinda like the general idea you patented, that would never happen.
Why isn't this like copyright law? where publication of the idea or object etc is in and of itself a sort of declaration of ownership of the thing or idea? sure filing a document to provide some details and limitations etc is a all well and good but shouldn't it be assumed that you cannot copy someone else's work regardless of whether or not the original followed some arcane set of rules to ensure that a bureaucrat somewhere had his pockets lined as protection?
Sacto joe, the rest of the world does have its own laws, no matter how bad you'd want to think the US = everything.
You may not like it, but the US is a bit exceptional. In a lot of these areas, a lot of the rest of the world has simply borrowed US legal ideas: Federal Reserve, antitrust, shareholder protection, IP, securities laws, and international trade come to mind.
As we've discovered with the whole NSA spying episode, most of the rest of the world -- Germany foremost -- just bends over if the US really flexes its muscles.
'Ironic' is not the right word to describe this twist. It's bizarre. It will affect a lot of EU companies too, so I am guessing it'll be thrown out on appeal to a court at the EU level.
Comments
+1
-1
Google and Samsung won't know what to copy next.
Look at how Samsung is shamelessly trying to copy the iPhone colors.
Apple needs to deal Samsung a blow in the TV market.
Time will tell.
This is twisted beyond average stupidity.
This is outrageous. Demo your own invention, then patent it and have it invalidated because you demoed it prior to patenting it.
That is the rule everywhere in the world, except in the USA. The USA use a 1 year grace period and allowed for submarine patents which is nasty because it is used by patent trolls a lot.
More, it seems that Apple filed a separate EU patent rather than an extension of the US patent from what I gather. This is why they are in trouble, as filing an extension to the US patent would not have bumped in the early disclosure rule. But the EU patent could have been then invalidated if the USA patent had been.
So you can't show your invent before filing patent. Not reasonable in my thought.
Ouch! I believe that's called a technicality.
Well, while I agree that this is bad luck for Apple, it seems to me like a pretty clear and fundamental principle of German patent law (i.e. apply for patent before public disclosure) ... to dismiss it as a technicality is a bit much (but I know what you meant). It's not clear the court had any other choice in its decision, given that's the law. Apple has been a multinational for years, and should really know the rules of the game outside of the US.
So you can't show your invent before filing patent. Not reasonable in my thought.
Actually you can. eg to investors, and making them sign NDA. What you cannot do is disclosing it in a public event or a publication. the video is both.
Even then it is ridiculous that a company's own invention is being invalidated because the founder demo it in advance.
I wonder will his job prospect the same as the British one when he retires or a Swiss account being opened for him.
Say what?! But Steve was demonstrating the very feature they were going to patent later ... kind of a recursive thing there.
Re-reading the article above, it does kinda give me the idea we're not getting the full story.
Near the end, it says the patent was invalidated by two other companies prior art.
Is that talking about a different patent or case?
Or has the Steve Jobs video bit been over emphasised?
My dear...
1. Nobody is perfect (or was - and this also includes Steve Jobs).
2. No rule nor law is perfect (ever was - and this also includes american laws).
So, please, don't go thinking that the local values of USA are supposed to be universal. They're not, period.
Sarcasm detector: off
Lawyers can screw up just about anything.
Yes, very true, but if you file a patent, attain it, and release a product with said invention before anyone else I think the logic of prior art against yourself should fall away. But your point above is valid. The German system makes more sense.
Well at least the law is clear in this case it's not as if someone could file a patent for some vague idea without any details on just how it would be implemented either in silicon, or in code, or in an actual user interface and then sit back for years and wait until someone independently comes up with an actual implementation of an idea that sort of resembles the patent and then sue the maker of an actual thing which is kinda like the general idea you patented, that would never happen.
Why isn't this like copyright law? where publication of the idea or object etc is in and of itself a sort of declaration of ownership of the thing or idea? sure filing a document to provide some details and limitations etc is a all well and good but shouldn't it be assumed that you cannot copy someone else's work regardless of whether or not the original followed some arcane set of rules to ensure that a bureaucrat somewhere had his pockets lined as protection?
You may not like it, but the US is a bit exceptional. In a lot of these areas, a lot of the rest of the world has simply borrowed US legal ideas: Federal Reserve, antitrust, shareholder protection, IP, securities laws, and international trade come to mind.
As we've discovered with the whole NSA spying episode, most of the rest of the world -- Germany foremost -- just bends over if the US really flexes its muscles.