Search results for

The Singapore Patents Act defines a patentable invention as one that is novel, inventive and capable of industrial application. Like most jurisdictions in the world, Singapore adopts an absolute novelty requirement. For an invention to be novel in Singapore, it must not form part of the state of the art. The Act defines the state of the art as follows:

Japanese patent applications should be exceptionally careful in describing the claim of the patent, as courts favor an objective determination of disputes concerning the matters set out in the application. Underscoring this is a recent judgment of the Osaka District Court, which ruled against the holder of a brand-name pharmaceutical patent and in favour of a generic company due to the former's carelessness in determining the claim.

Generally slogans are considered marketing tools rather than indications of the origin of a good or service, so registering them as trademarks is difficult, and not just in Israel. However, many companies invest considerable resources in developing slogans for branding, and wish to prevent others from using them.

In a recent judgment, the Court of Justice of the EU was called upon to interpret Article 9 of the European Directive 98/44/EC (Biotech Directive) in respect to the scope of protection of a patent on a product containing genetic information (Judgment of July 6 2010; case C-428/08; Monsanto v Cefetra et al).

Although plant variety protection is available on the Community level in Europe by Regulation 2100/94/EC, member states continue to have national legislation in place which is not uniform. In view of IP strategy for plant commercialisation within Europe, it could thus be worthwhile for applicants to figure out the most suitable regime.

The Indian Trade Marks Rules 2002 were recently amended to adopt the Ninth Edition of Nice Classification, in order to align the trade mark laws in India with the international system. Additional service classes, namely classes 43-45, have been added. The applicants are requested to bring their existing applications in compliance with the new classification. All new applications for classes 43-45 with effect from July 1 2010 will be accepted by the Trade Mark Office in accordance with the new specification of services.

Since last year's Americas IP Focus went to press, the law has evolved rapidly. Perhaps most internationally relevant was the US Supreme Court's June decision in Bilski v Kappos, which changed the criteria for determining patent eligible subject matter in the US and reinforced the country's commitment to allowing patents on business methods and software. It will be years before the true impact of that decision is known – as the lower courts and the USPTO attempt to define what constitutes an abstract idea and how much weight the machine-or-transformation test should still hold.

At the time Greece acceded to the European Patent Convention, a reservation was filed under article 167.2a by which patents providing protection to pharmaceutical products as such should not have effect in Greece. While the reservation expired in 1992, the effects of the reservation on patents filed while this was in effect would exist during the entire life of these patents.

On July 2 2010, the Advocates General (AG) of the Court of Justice of the EU delivered their statement of opinion regarding the draft agreement on the establishment of a European patent court. The opinion of the AG, which is non-binding on the Court, concludes that the draft agreement is incompatible with EU law. The reasons underlying this conclusion are, however, of such a nature that it seems possible to overcome the AG's objections by rather uncontroversial amendments to the agreement, and possibly of the European Patent Convention.

The Austrian Supreme Court recently handed down a judgment that may answer some burning questions on patent infringement proceedings.