Search results for

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.

Gladys Mirandah and George Miranda outline what you should include in licensing agreements for Singapore and Malaysia to exploit fully your IP rights

In an exclusive survey, MIP reveals the US and European firms with the most IP practitioners

Due to the great flow of capital generated by royalties payments between nations, as well as between Mexican citizens and foreigners, the legal attorneys of IP rights owners must consider the fiscal rules. In accordance with Mexican law, fiscal treatment is granted to the income obtained from royalties payments, so that the payments can be deductible and generate a benefit to their clients.

Draft legislation will revamp Australia's designs law. But it may not achieve its twin aims of making registration tougher and strengthening enforcement, argue Jamie Nettleton and Lydia Santoso

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.

US courtrooms are becoming temples to technology as litigators use videos, CD-ROMs and e-mail to argue their case. Ingrid Hering reports

On April 1 1999, the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (the Act) came into force in Malaysia. The objectives are to promote national policies for the communications and multimedia industries, not least of which is to establish Malaysia as a major global centre for communications and multimedia information and content services; to establish a supporting licensing and regulatory framework, and to regulate the Communications and Multimedia Commission. Interestingly, the Act expressly denies any attempt to censor the Internet.