Search results for

IP litigators and their clients are scrambling to revise enforcement strategies to keep up with new developments in the law, while keeping a close eye on the next few months, discuss Elliott S Simcoe and L Catherine Eckenswiller of Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh in Ottawa

Liberal legislation and a stable economic environment has fostered enthusiasm for licensing in Mexico, explains Jose Antonio Romero

An application for a business method patent is subject to the same requirements of novelty, inventiveness and industrial applicability as any other patent application in Korea. Careful drafting will secure your rights, explain Eun-Jin JUNG & Andrew CHOUNG, of Kim & Chang

The recent decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Board of Education ex rel Board of Trustees of Florida State University v American Bioscience Inc, 67 USPQ 2d 1252 (Fed Cir 2003) focuses on the importance under US law of correctly naming the true inventor (or inventors) on US patents. While the decision enunciates no new legal principles, its thorough discussion of the criteria for inventorship under US law merits attention. In particular, this discussion should be helpful in the US and elsewhere to institutions of higher learning in clarifying that the criteria generally used in naming authors on scientific papers are inapplicable to patent inventorship determinations. In addition, non-US companies and other groups applying for US patents will find that this discussion presents in one place a clear exposition of US inventorship criteria.

One of the most elusive questions in copyright litigation faced by courts the world over has been how to map out the horizons of the idea/expression dichotomy. In 1978, the Supreme Court of India in the RG Anand case held that one of the surest and safest tests to determine whether or not there has been a copyright infringement is to see if the reader after having read both the works gets an unmistakable impression that the subsequent work appears to be a copy of the original.

Since July 1 2003, the European Patent Office has started a new pilot project which may be of interest to a large number of applicants.

Where to litigate and how to collect evidence are two of the more important issues for a party in a patent infringement action in China. In the first of a two-part article, Gordon Gao explains how to avoid mistakes

Criminal procedures can be an effective means of taking action against counterfeiters. Steven Bazerman and Jason Drangel examine the opportunities for rights owners at federal and state level in the US

Ingrid Hering, London

Trade mark owners in Mexico may be unfairly disadvantaged by the lack of legal protection against the filing of new, similar or identical trade mark applications. Proposed changes could provide welcome news, predicts Victor Adames