A Florida Patent Attorney's Suit of Armor: Integrity
A great majority of the news on patents deals with patent infringement, patent law, and, not coincidentally, it brings to mind the overriding importance of ethics in protecting intellectual property--and profits. As a Florida patent attorney, the long term growth of my business depends on the integrity of the patent applications I file, and recent news underlines its significance.
In a recent online edition of the International Herald-Tribune, Robert Pear wrote an article on just this issue. Currently, patent law dictates that patents held by companies or individuals who have engaged in "inequitable conduct" are subject to having those patents revoked. A pretty severe penalty--maybe, and the subject of hot debate in today's courtrooms.
Patent laws, which affect Florida patent attorneys and patent seekers (and interested parties everywhere), are at the crossroads, with some lobbying for "the biggest changes in U.S. patent law in more than 50 years." Very nearly every industry is represented.
On the one hand, opponents of current patent law wonder if the law is too severe for what senior VP and general counsel for Eli Lilly calls "relatively minor acts of misconduct." According to the article, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has found inequitable conduct in "at least 40 cases, including 14 that involved pharmaceutical or health care products." Types of misconduct have included submitting false statements to the patent office, a lack of accuracy in describing experiments, and concealing information contradicting their claims. Brand name drug companies and the companies who support them report that accusations are frequent and, often simply "honest mistakes."
On the other hand, I wonder: In patenting, particularly medical patenting, is there really any room for mistakes--honest or otherwise? Florida patent attorneys and patent attorneys everywhere who are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office know that protecting their clients requires the utmost in meticulous attention to detail (after detail after detail). The better the application, the more quickly it passes, the more secure the received patent is from attack, and the more the client is free to profit from it. With patent infringement and other litigation costing us into the billions of dollars, can we really afford misinformation and mistakes?
Consumer groups think not, though recent patent legislation threatens to make it a little easier to make "mistakes." The House of Representatives approved a bill making it more difficult to prove inequitable conduct, and the Senate Judiciary Committee are "haggling over a companion bill." That bill may reach the floor this summer.
The need to stop unfounded accusations notwithstanding, this Florida patent attorney is hopeful that the backbone of integrity that supports the patent system will win out and grow in strength in years to come.
Samsung Patents Interchangeable Cell Phone Keypad
Recently, I posted a blog about Apple's patent pending idea to sell a keyboard with dynamically shifting keys. (A number of keys on the keyboard have the ability to change according to the user's needs.) They're not the only ones who want to patent ideas to make things more fluid for users.Samsung has filed a patent application for a cell phone with interchangeable keypads(HT Lounge, January 28, 2008). There is one keypad for regular phone dialing, and one with a QWERTY keyboard for text messaging and other word processing functions. The patent includes a gaming pad, music controls, etc.
As a Florida Patent Attorney, I've seen a lot of ideas--in this category and more. I think the concept of a cell phone keypad that changes to suit what the user is doing at the moment is great. I know how fast some of us can text message on a regular cell phone keypad; however, it is a lot more convenient to type on a QWERTY keyboard.
That said, Samsung's patent is for physical keypads you have to change manually, and, well, I think you're just trading convenience. Is it more or less convenient to text on a cell phone than to have to physically change the keypad. And, I don't know who would have the inclination to take the time to do it, or even the storage space to tote all those keypads around.
Anyone else want to weigh in here? (Florida Patent Attorneys included.) I'm curious. Posted By John Rizvi In Invention & Patent Basics , Patents , Patent Cases, News & Updates , Patenting Misconceptions 0 Comments Permalink
Nine Costly Misconceptions About Patents
If life were like the popular board game Monopoly ®, obtaining meaningful patent protection would be as simple as buying up Boardwalk and Park Place. In the board game, you simply purchase the property you want, place houses or hotels on them over time, and eagerly collect a continual revenue stream from the successful venture.
The rules governing monopolies on ideas, however, are significantly more complex. As you mull over the unique features of your newly discovered invention or method of doing business, I want to dispel a number of common, yet potentially dangerous, misconceptions about patents:
Misconception No. 1: All of the good ideas have already been patented.
Fact: In 1899, U.S. Commissioner of Patents Charles H. Duell reportedly stated that "everything that can be invented has been invented." His statement, as we all know, was followed by the invention of the airplane, television, radio, cars, computers, biotechnology, space travel, microwave ovens, cellular phones, digital cameras, the artificial heart, and the internet! The line of thinking that all the good ideas are gone is as wrong today as it was back then. Major pioneering inventions, such as the development of the internet, are being made on a daily basis and there appears to be no end in sight.
Misconception No. 2: It is necessary to include a working model of your invention along with an application for a patent.
Fact: This is a very common misconception. Working models, prototypes, or exhibits are very rarely required for most patent applications. Even the Wright Brothers had not flown when they applied for their groundbreaking aeronautical patents. Their famous Kitty Hawk adventure did not occur until March 23, 1903, a full nine months after the filing of their patent.
Although a working model is not generally required, the description of the invention in the specification and the drawings does have to be sufficiently clear and complete to permit the invention to be understood by someone familiar with the field of the technology.
Continue Reading Posted By John Rizvi In Invention & Patent Basics , Advanced Patent Issues , Patenting Misconceptions 0 Comments Permalink