intoIP.com - Global IP Newsfeed

tm lawfield

tm law has been changed

Benoît Battistelli takes over as President of the EPO

http://www.epo.org/topics/news/2010/201000701.html Benoît Battistelli takes over as President of the EPO 1 July 2010 Benoît Battistelli took up office today as President of the EPO. A French national, he succeeds Alison Brimelow of the UK, who has headed the EPO since July 2007. Mr Battistelli was elected President in March 2010 by the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation, the EPO's governing body. His term of office is five years. In a first statement, the new President paid tribute to his predecessors' significant contribution to developing the European patent system over the past 30 years and to the EPO's 7 000 employees who perform a vital function for the European economy and have turned the office into a benchmark of patent quality. Outlining the aims of his presidency, Mr Battistelli cites the need to safeguard this high quality and keep the EPO on track to face new challenges: "My first EPO internal priority will be to develop a climate of trust between the management and staff of the Office". Externally, against the background of the growing importance of a global economy, he cites the need to improve co-operation with the EPO member states in the framework of the European network of patent offices, and strengthen international co-operation in order to reduce duplication of work at patent offices around the world. Two key projects, in which the EPO should continue to harness its expertise, are the introduction of a European Union patent and the development of a European patent litigation system. Benoît Battistelli has had a long and distinguished career in the French civil service. A lawyer by training and graduate of the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris (IEP) and Ecole nationale d'administration (ENA), he joined the Ministry of Economic and Financial Affairs in 1978 and has been instrumental in developing and implementing public policy in various ministries and public bodies. He has served as trade commissioner or deputy trade commissioner at the French embassies in Italy, India, Turkey and Poland. In 1999 he was named Deputy Undersecretary for Industry in charge of innovation policy and competitiveness in the Ministry of Economic, Financial and Industrial Affairs, and in 2002 he became Chief Advisor to Industry Minister Nicole Fontaine. In May 2004, Mr Battistelli was appointed Director General of the French National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI). He has also served as Deputy Chairman (December 2006 until March 2009) and Chairman (since March 2009) of the EPO's Administrative Council, and Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the European Patent Academy (July 2005-July 2008).

abcdef

asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas asas

Serbia to join the EPO

The government of the Republic of Serbia deposited its instrument of accession to the European Patent Convention (EPC) on 15 July and is set to become the EPO's 38th member state on 1 October 2010. European patent applications filed on or after this date will include the designation of the new contracting state, but it will not be possible to designate Serbia retroactively in applications filed beforehand. The EPO can, however, accord applications filed in September the filing date of 1 October upon the applicant's request. Nationals of and residents in Serbia will also be able to file applications under the Patent Co-operation Treaty (PCT) with the EPO from 1 October.

test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktionttest für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktionttest für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont

dfdfdf test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont test für twriter mit url um zu sehen ob funktiont

Warning against misleading requests for payment

The German Patent and Trade Mark Office has been contacted by a number of applicants and holders of IP rights. The clients had received allegedly official invitations to pay from private firms for the entry of their IP titles in publications or private registers. The accompanying letters regularly convey the impression that the recipients must pay the requested amount. Frequently, the letters contain details such as the file number or the application or registration dates. Sometimes, print-outs of the official gazettes (Markenblatt, Geschmacksmusterblatt, Patentblatt) are attached. The DPMA would like to remind all customers that the registration of or changes in relation to IP rights are published ex officio and that official fees are collected exclusively by the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, as a rule in advance. Payment forms issued by other senders should be examined carefully. The DPMA has repeatedly filed criminal charges for fraud. To our regret, it is difficult to sue these firms, since the invitations to pay are usually posted abroad and new senders tend to appear.

EPO and Google collaborate on machine translation

30 November 2010 The EPO and Google have today signed a Memorandum of Understanding to improve access to patent translations in multiple languages. Under the agreement, the EPO will use Google's machine translation technology to translate patents into the languages of the 38 countries that it serves. In return, it will provide Google with access to its translated patents, enabling Google to optimise its machine translation technology. Google technology will be used to translate patents originating in Europe as well as patents originating in other regions of the world and enjoying protection in Europe. The collaboration aims to offer faster and cheaper fit-for-purpose translations of patents for companies, inventors and scientists in Europe. Today, anyone wishing to register a patent must do so in one of the EPO's official languages - English, French and German. They then need to arrange for translation of the patent - at their own cost - into the languages of all countries in which they wish the patent to apply. This complexity means that many European patents are not available in all national languages or legally binding in all the EPO's member states. Similarly, anyone searching for information in patents published in foreign languages finds it difficult to retrieve data relevant to their research projects. "The European Patent Office is one of the largest providers of free information on state-of-the-art technology disclosed in patents from around the globe. The partnership with Google to create machine translation tools for patents will help inventors, engineers and R+D teams to retrieve relevant documents efficiently - in their own language - from our wealth of published patent information. This agreement with Google puts the EPO at the forefront of efforts to strengthen the patent system's international character and improve its quality for the benefit of the global economy," said EPO President Benoît Battistelli. The collaboration also aims to facilitate the decision process of the EU states in their attempt to simplify the introduction of a single pan-European patent. While the EPO provides a common entry point to obtain patents throughout Europe, patent owners must still validate and, where necessary, translate patents in each individual EU country. As a result, obtaining Europe-wide patent protection is significantly more expensive than in markets such as the US. A single EU patent could reduce costs and enhance legal certainty, giving businesses and innovators unified protection for their inventions. For Google, the collaboration offers a major opportunity to improve its translation service. The EPO will offer access to around 1.5 million documents, and each year this number grows by more than 50 000 new patent grants. The partnership also covers Asian languages. Facilitating access to the rapidly increasing volumes of Japanese, Chinese and Korean technological information is one of the biggest challenges facing the global patent system. "This collaboration is exciting for both Google and Europe. It will help to increase access to information for all Europeans, supporting the innovation process and allowing the European economy to strengthen its competitiveness," said Carlo d'Asaro Biondo, Google's Vice President of Sales for Southern and Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa. "It demonstrates how private companies can work with public institutions to find innovative solutions to difficult issues." (c) European Patent Office, EPO

No European patents for essentially biological breeding processes

9 December 2010 The EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal has now rendered its decisions in the so-called "broccoli" (G 2/07) and "tomato" (G 1/08) cases, bearing on the correct interpretation of the term "essentially biological processes for the production of plants (or animals)" used in the European Patent Convention (EPC) to exclude such processes from patentability. The Enlarged Board of Appeal is the highest instance in the EPO's judiciary and, as all other Boards of Appeal of the EPO, acts in full independence of the Office in carrying out its duties. Its task is to ensure a uniform application of the patent law under the EPC. In its decision the Board concludes that a process for the production of plants involving sexually crossing whole plant genomes, and the subsequent selection of plants is not patentable. The mere inclusion of a technical step which serves to enable or assist the performance of the steps of sexually crossing the whole genomes of plants or of subsequently selecting plants does not override this exclusion from patentability. While technical devices or means, such as genetic markers, may themselves be patentable inventions, their use does not make an essentially biological process patentable. The Board held finally that processes for producing plants by inserting or modifying a trait in the genome by using genetic engineering do not rely on sexual crossing of whole genomes and may therefore be patentable. However, in such a case sexual crossing and selection steps should not be in the claims, since adding further technical processing steps before or after the steps of sexual crossing and selection does not render such processes patentable either. To reach their decision, the Board considered the arguments put forward by the respective patent owners and opponents in the cases underlying the referral decisions (T 83/05 - Broccoli and T 1242/06 - Tomatoes), the comments submitted by the President of the EPO and the vast number of submissions by the public, the so-called "amicus curiae" letters, which it had solicited in the course of procedure. In its 70 pages long decision the Enlarged Board of the EPO also gave a very comprehensive overview of the historical development of the relevant legislation and case law referring to the question of the patentability of essentially biological processes in Europe, including the development of the so-called Biotech Directive (98/44/EC) of the European Parliament and Council. While the present decisions have the objective of clarifying the legal meaning of the concept of "essentially biological processes" under the EPC, a first concrete application will be provided by the Technical Boards of Appeal, which had referred the questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal and are now called to decide upon the individual cases in the light of the guidance provided by the Enlarged Board of Appeal. (c) European Patent Office, EPO

Regulation change of Turkish Patent Institute may effect registered trademarks in 35th class

Turkish Patent Institute prepares a regulation change in the scope of 35th class's "retail and wholesale services" part. The classification definition for selling services has been "gathering together various goods of different origin into an assortment, and offering them for sale in an homogeneous environment, whether in an actual retail outlet or shop, by mail-order, or over the Internet". Applicants have been able to add special additions like “selling services of shoes, textile products, bags, etc...” but many of the registrations' classification definition has just been including the subject written above. The regulaton change may effect those registered trademarks which has not got spesific definitions about what was going to be sold. It may be clearified with a simple example. The trademark "A" is registered in selling services and does not have any spesific definition added to the regular classification. The next applicant of the trademark “A” is going to be able to file a registration application with only spesific definition of the certain goods such like "selling services of hardware, selling services of dairy products, etc...". From our view two certain effects are supposed to be happened: 1- The positive result: Applicants are going to be able to register the trademarks which they had been unable before. 2- The negative result: Registrants which did not write spesific definitions to their classification while first filing are going to be faced with the possible loss of right due to a new application including their selling area.

Single patent co-operation plan gets committee go-ahead

Plans to use the enhanced co-operation procedure to create a unitary patent system in the EU, as requested by 12 Member States last year, were approved by the Legal Affairs Committee on 27 January. If Parliament as a whole and Council authorise this use of enhanced cooperation, the Commission will have to table two legislative proposals - one on the language regime and the other establishing the single patent. The Legal Affairs Committee gave its consent to the use of enhanced cooperation to create unitary patent protection in a report by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP-ED, DE), which was approved by a large majority. The request by 12 Member States (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Lithuania, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden and the UK), to start an enhanced cooperation procedure came in December 2010, after the Member States concluded that no EU-wide agreement on the issue could be found within the Council. Other Member States may join the enhanced cooperation at any time. Next steps The European Parliament as a whole will vote on the proposal during the February Strasbourg session and the Competitiveness Council will examine it on 10 March. If the enhanced cooperation is authorised by both Parliament and the Council, the Commission will present two proposals: one on the language regime (consultation procedure) and the other establishing the single patent (co-decision procedure). The Legal Affairs Committee is calling on the Council to use co-decision procedure for both proposals. Background Member States have been trying to agree on a unitary patent system for years but all their efforts to achieve unanimity, including those based on Commission proposals in 2000, 2009 and 2010, have failed. Language issues have proven especially problematic. Currently, national patents coexist with a European patent but the system is complicated, since patent holders must choose the countries where they want patent protection and Member States may impose additional requirements. Furthermore, European patents are only enforced by national laws. This fragmented system is complex and expensive: according to the European Commission, a European patent validated in 13 countries can cost up to €18,000, of which nearly €10,000 goes to pay translation fees alone. This makes a European patent 10 times more expensive than a comparable US patent. The unitary patent system aims to make it cheaper and easier for inventors to seek EU-wide patent protection, ensure equal access to all inventors within the EU, help to tackle infringements, and improve conditions for innovative businesses by removing patent rights "borders" among Member States. What is enhanced co-operation? Under EU rules, enhanced co-operation can be used to enable some Member States to move forward on new rules when a unanimous agreement cannot be found. The Lisbon Treaty enables a minimum of nine Member States to co-operate using the European institutional framework where a legislative initiative in an area of non-exclusive EU competence is blocked. This is the second time that enhanced cooperation would be used. The first, on the cross-border applicability of divorce laws, was approved in 2010. Enhanced co-operation may begin after the Council authorises it on the basis of a Commission proposal and after the European Parliament has given its consent. In the chair: Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) Plenary vote: February REF. : 20110124IPR12359 © European Union, 2011 – EP

Awaiting the new Trademarks Act on 1 July 2011 – Maybe you should request a suspension of examination of your application

1 July 2011, the new Trademarks Act (SFS 2010:1877) enters into force. The Act introduces new provisions for family names and artist names. In addition, the special protection for distinctive titles is struck. These amendments may in some cases lead to a different assessment of the possibility to register applied marks than before. In light of the above mentioned circumstances you can therefore request a suspension of examination of your application containing a family name, artist name or title. A suspension means that the PRV (Swedish patent office) will not examine your case in the transition period until the new trademark law comes into force. This is to facilitate the processing of trademark applications which contain a family name, artist name or title. To request a suspension, please contact the PRV. © Swedish patent office

Now available at the WIPO website: The PCT – International Patent System yearly review 2010

Find the latest yearly review for 2010 now online at the WIPO website. The report provides a comprehensive view of PCT filings in 2010 and many additional statistics regarding the international patent system. All you need is a Acrobat Reader since the document is a .pdf-file. Find the latest yearly review for 2010 now online at the WIPO website. The report provides a comprehensive view of PCT filings in 2010 and many additional statistics regarding the international patent system. All you need is a Acrobat Reader since the document is a .pdf-file.

SIPO and JPO to Commence a Pre-Pilot of Patent Prosecution Highway between Both Offices

Tian Lipu, Commissioner of the State Intellectual Property Office of the P. R. China, met with Yoshiyuki Iwai, Commissioner of the Japan Patent Office, in Beijing on May 4. The commissioners exchanged their views on the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH). The SIPO and the JPO have been discussing to start the PPH pilot program between both offices. This time, both commissioners of the SIPO and the JPO recognized the effectiveness and importance of PPH and agreed on the PPH pre-pilot which would involve only prescribed number of applications. It is to confirm the internal procedures regarding the PPH pilot program, and only prescribed applications could join the pre-pilot. When both offices confirm no problem with the internal procedures through the pre-pilot and reach agreement on the PPH pilot program, any applicant may request PPH to each office under prescribed requirements.

Design applications using 3D illustrations successfully implemented for the first time in the world

Design applications using 3D illustrations implemented in 2010 by the Korea Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) reached 786 cases (1.4 percent of all design applications). Among them, submissions by small and medium businesses and individuals counted for 98.6 percent. This is the world's first 3D illustration application system where applicants can directly submit 3D illustrations they have to make when developing products, without further processing. This has enhanced the convenience of designers and applicants and saved about KRW 200 million in costs* Further, small and medium businesses as well as individuals have found this system to save time when producing illustrations enabling the speedy acquisition of rights in reflection of the needs of small and medium businesses. * KRW 200 million = [cost to produce illustration (KRW 300,000) × 786 cases (applications in 2010)] (approx. 185.000 USD)

Director General welcomes the UK Independent Review of Intellectual Property and Growth

The Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization, Francis Gurry, welcomed the publication today of Digital Opportunity, the Review of Intellectual Property and Growth prepared by Professor Ian Hargreaves. “The Review succeeds in being both thought-provoking and realistic”, Mr. Gurry said, adding that he thought that the Review would “be influential well beyond the United Kingdom in developing responses to the many challenges confronting intellectual property. The Recommendations of Professor Hargreaves deserve very careful consideration by all those interested in ensuring that intellectual property continues to perform its role of promoting innovation, cultural dynamism and economic growth in a world of rapidly changing technological, economic and geopolitical realities.” (c) WIPO - World Intellectual Property Organization