Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ASSIGNMENT
ON
PATENT
INFRINGEMENT
[INTEACTUAL PROPERTY
RIGHTS II]
Name-jarrar ahmad
B.A LL.B (H) 9th Semester
SECTION A
ROLL NO -13
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Delhi
JARRAR AHMAD
Contents: Introduction
Elements of Patent Infringement
Indirect Infringement
Legislation
Clearance Search, Clearance Validity and Enforceability Opinions
Patent Infringement Insurance
Piracy
Threat to bring Infringement Action
Notable Infringement Cases
Bibliography
INTRODUCTION:
it was not performing any infringing act in the territory covered by the
patent;
Indirect infringement:
In certain jurisdictions, there is a particular case of patent infringement called
"indirect infringement." Indirect infringement can occur, for instance, when a
device is claimed in patent and a third party supplies a product which can only
be reasonably used to make the claimed device.
Legislation
Canada:
In Canada, patents are governed by the Patent Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. P-4).
Section 42 of the Patent Act establishes the rights of a patent holder:
42. Every patent granted under this Act shall contain the title or name of the
invention, with a reference to the specification, and shall, subject to this Act,
grant to the patentee and the patentees legal representatives for the term of the
patent, from the granting of the patent, the exclusive right, privilege and
liberty of making, constructing, using the invention and selling it to others
to be used, subject to adjudication in respect thereof before any court of
competent jurisdiction.
By granting the patent holder the exclusive right, privilege and liberty of
making, constructing, using, and selling the invention, the patent act establishes
that any other person making, constructing, using, or selling the patented
invention is infringing that patent. Whether there has been an infringement of a
patent is usually a question of fact.
Europe:
(i) where a patent has been granted for an invention of a product, acts of
producing, assigning, etc., importing or offering for assignment, etc. any
product to be used exclusively for the producing of the said product as a
business;
(ii) where a patent has been granted for an invention of a product, acts of
producing, assigning, etc., importing or offering for assignment, etc. any
product (excluding those widely distributed within Japan) to be used for the
producing of the said product and indispensable for the resolution of the
problem by the said invention as a business, knowing that the said invention
is a patented invention and the said product is used for the working of the
invention;
(iii) where a patent has been granted for an invention of a process, acts of
producing, assigning, etc., importing or offering for assignment, etc. any
product to be used exclusively for the use of the said process as a business;
and
(iv) where a patent has been granted for an invention of a process, acts of
producing, assigning, etc., importing or offering for assignment, etc. any
product (excluding those widely distributed within Japan) to be used for the
use of the said process and indispensable for the resolution of the problem
by the said invention, knowing that the said invention is a patented invention
and the said product is used for the working of the invention as a business.
United Kingdom:
Infringement under United Kingdom patent law is defined by Section 60 of
the UK Patents Act 1977 (as amended), which sets out the following types of
infringement:
Where the invention is a process, by the use, or offer for use where it is
known that the use of the process would be an infringement. Also, by the
disposal of, offer to dispose of, use or import of a product obtained directly
by means of that process, or the keeping of any such product whether for
disposal or otherwise.
United States:
In United States law, an infringement may occur where the defendant has made,
used,
sold,
offered
to
sell,
or
imported
an
infringing invention or
The cost of these opinions for U.S. patents can run from tens to hundreds of
thousands of dollars (or more) depending upon the particular patent, the number
of defenses and prior art references, the length of the prosecution file history,
and the complexity of the technology in question.
An exculpatory opinion (setting forth reasons the patent is not infringed, or
providing other defenses such as prior use, intervening rights, or prior
invention) is also possible.
and technical benefits to the EU and individual patentees which would arise
from a widespread PLI scheme.
Piracy
Since the 1840s, the expression "patent pirate" has been used as
a pejorative term to describe those that infringe a patent and refuse to
acknowledge the priority of the inventor. Samuel F. B. Morse, inventor of
the telegraph, for example, complained in a letter to friend in 1848
I have been so constantly under the necessity of watching the movements
of the most unprincipled set of pirates I have ever known, that all my time
has been occupied in defense, in putting evidence into something like
legal shape that I am the inventor of the Electro-Magnetic Telegraph!!
Would you have believed it ten years ago that a question could be raised
on that subject?
Those who accuse others of being patent pirates say that they take advantage
of the high cost of enforcing a patent to willfully infringe valid patents with
impunity, knowing that the average small inventor does not have the
financial resources required to enforce their patent rights. In the US, for
example, an inventor must budget $1 million or more in order to initiate
patent litigation. They say that patent pirates also take advantage of
countries where patent rights are difficult to enforce and willfully infringe in
those countries.
Ironically, the term "pirate" has also been used to describe patent owners that
vigorously enforce their patents. Thus whether one deliberately infringes a
Bibliography