Comments for CanadaPatentBlog http://canadapatentblog.com International Patent Matters from a Canadian Patent Lawyer's Perspective Wed, 08 Sep 2010 23:02:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0 Comment on Patenting Software in Canada by Alex Kuhnert http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=58#comment-13261 Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:22:01 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=58#comment-13261 David - a great summary! With these proposed changes, will firms like Microsoft move thier software code from a trade secret IP strategy to a patent strategy? What might be the commercial benefits and to whom if such a tactic were commercially implemented? Where would ownership of IP code reside? Is each PC the residence or is the head office the residence of the code with each PC user only licensed? David - a great summary!

With these proposed changes, will firms like Microsoft move thier software code from a trade secret IP strategy to a patent strategy? What might be the commercial benefits and to whom if such a tactic were commercially implemented?

Where would ownership of IP code reside? Is each PC the residence or is the head office the residence of the code with each PC user only licensed?

]]> Comment on Priority Right When Abandoning And Refiling Applications by James Demers http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=37#comment-11379 Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:44:42 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=37#comment-11379 I've been unable to discover what happens to an applicant who breaks the rule of Art.4(C)(4). An examiner is unlikely to discover the existence of a not-quite-abandoned provisional, and surely a patent will issue despite the presence of the earlier application. Now suppose the facts come out in litigation. Is the patent invalid, or do we have to figure out the "correct" priority date and proceed from there? I’ve been unable to discover what happens to an applicant who breaks the rule of Art.4(C)(4). An examiner is unlikely to discover the existence of a not-quite-abandoned provisional, and surely a patent will issue despite the presence of the earlier application. Now suppose the facts come out in litigation. Is the patent invalid, or do we have to figure out the “correct” priority date and proceed from there?

]]> Comment on Career Choices for Engineers: Lawyer or Patent Agent? by james http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=41#comment-9394 Wed, 14 Oct 2009 14:23:23 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=41#comment-9394 Definitely one of the better posts I've read in a while. Thanks! Definitely one of the better posts I’ve read in a while. Thanks!

]]> Comment on by drago 2009 скачать бесплатно http://canadapatentblog.com/?page_id=32#comment-8609 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:48:14 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?page_id=32#comment-8609 The Interesting subject, with pleasure shall read Your blog. The Interesting subject, with pleasure shall read Your blog.

]]> Comment on Invention Harvesting vs Directed Inventing by Bhuwneesh, Toronto http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=43#comment-8328 Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:23:24 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=43#comment-8328 As an IP analyst with a Multinational, I came across a "classic corporate invention harvesting mechanism" over 1000 patents in last 5 years by R&D center but when business center reviewed them, less than 10 were selected...rest were dumped. Why this happened since there are incentives attached to each patent filed by "workers at the bottom of the corporation", only quantity matters not the quality. One could imagine how much time and money was wasted on 990+ patents.... As an IP analyst with a Multinational, I came across a “classic corporate invention harvesting mechanism” over 1000 patents in last 5 years by R&D center but when business center reviewed them, less than 10 were selected…rest were dumped. Why this happened since there are incentives attached to each patent filed by “workers at the bottom of the corporation”, only quantity matters not the quality. One could imagine how much time and money was wasted on 990+ patents….

]]> Comment on US Provisionals and the Priority Year by dave http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=38#comment-8289 Wed, 02 Sep 2009 18:24:07 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=38#comment-8289 I think I found the answer and it's yes I think I found the answer and it’s yes

]]> Comment on US Provisionals and the Priority Year by dave http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=38#comment-8270 Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:52:07 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=38#comment-8270 hey, great site, I just came about it while looking for this info. I'm wondering if you can answer a quick question: I live in Canada, if I file a provisional application here, that will allow me to file a non-provisional (full) application within both Canada and the US within a year, is that correct? Or do I need to file a provisional application to both Canada and the US right now? I can't seem to find this info. Thank you so much!! hey, great site, I just came about it while looking for this info.

I’m wondering if you can answer a quick question:
I live in Canada, if I file a provisional application here, that will allow me to file a non-provisional (full) application within both Canada and the US within a year, is that correct? Or do I need to file a provisional application to both Canada and the US right now? I can’t seem to find this info.

Thank you so much!!

]]> Comment on Invention Harvesting vs Directed Inventing by RMK http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=43#comment-8111 Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:59:54 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=43#comment-8111 I found this article to be very useful. Innovation will be a key for companies to recover from the recessionary times we are currently in. Innovation takes creativity, time and money. By using the "requirements" set discussed here, we can focus our efforts. Patenting is very costly through its various stages. I agree, that from the company perspective, choices have to be made to only patent things that are relevant to the company, however, innovation is not company specific, so "not currently relevant", "harvested" or "by-chance" inventions should also be captured to be dealt with at a later date, or with a business relationship with another company. (tech transfer, licensing, spin- off, JV, etc) What are some preferred "Best Practices" or tips to appropriately capture the inventions brought forth via the above requirements? At the concept stage of the idea, it is not yet to be known as a patentable idea. The pre-filter, "Oh, someone must have thought of that already", could kill the invention before it starts. Some research and development and competitive and prior-art analysis to the above requirements is required before it should be taken to the patent disclosure stage. I look forward to further postings on this blog. Thank you. I found this article to be very useful. Innovation will be a key for companies to recover from the recessionary times we are currently in.

Innovation takes creativity, time and money. By using the “requirements” set discussed here, we can focus our efforts. Patenting is very costly through its various stages.

I agree, that from the company perspective, choices have to be made to only patent things that are relevant to the company, however, innovation is not company specific, so “not currently relevant”, “harvested” or “by-chance” inventions should also be captured to be dealt with at a later date, or with a business relationship with another company. (tech transfer, licensing, spin- off, JV, etc)

What are some preferred “Best Practices” or tips to appropriately capture the inventions brought forth via the above requirements?

At the concept stage of the idea, it is not yet to be known as a patentable idea. The pre-filter, “Oh, someone must have thought of that already”, could kill the invention before it starts. Some research and development and competitive and prior-art analysis to the above requirements is required before it should be taken to the patent disclosure stage.

I look forward to further postings on this blog. Thank you.

]]> Comment on Topping-up Canadian Patent Office fee payments under the special procedure of Bill C-29 by Payment Remittance http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=27#comment-8091 Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:58:09 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=27#comment-8091 Hi, Just found your blog on Technorati & Digg upcomming news feeds and read a few of your other posts. ISeems good contents,Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future. Thanks, Michael Hi,

Just found your blog on Technorati & Digg upcomming news feeds and read a few of your other posts.
ISeems good contents,Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future.

Thanks,
Michael

]]> Comment on Career Choices for Engineers: Lawyer or Patent Agent? by pph http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=41#comment-7768 Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:44:43 +0000 http://canadapatentblog.com/?p=41#comment-7768 Hi, I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future. Regards, Jane Hi,
I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future.
Regards,
Jane

]]>