Search results for

Business methods should remain unpatentable. That was the clear message coming from the UK last month. In a statement issued on March 13, the government stood firm in its position not to allow the patentability of business methods and to allow no change in the guidelines for patenting software. The government's stance is likely to bring the UK into direct conflict with the European Patent Office, the United States and the UK software industry, which believes it is losing out to its American colleagues.

How do you retain control over the design and rights in your website when contracting out the development? Susan Kim outlines the most important business and legal issues to consider when negotiating web site agreements

After much debate and a long gestation period, the EU Council of Ministers finally adopted on April 9 the Directive on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. At the time of writing, the Directive had not been published in the Official Journal, but this is likely to take place within a few weeks of April 9. Following publication, member states must implement the Directive in national law within 18 months. The intention was that the Copyright Directive should be implemented within a timescale similar to that for the implementation of the E-Commerce Directive, which must be implemented by member states by no later than January 17 2002. The Copyright Directive will have to be implemented by member states by about a year later than that. The Copyright Directive seeks to achieve a number of objectives. These include a degree of harmonization of copyright and related rights laws throughout the Community. The Directive also seeks to introduce protections for technical measures and rights-management information.

A recent High Court decision on copyright infringement has demonstrated the importance of distinguishing the author of a work from the rightful copyright owner of the work. As copyright is not registrable in many countries including Singapore, the locus standi to sue for copyright infringement does not stem from a simple registration certificate. It is always paramount to trace the copyright from the author of the work to the plaintiff in order to ensure that the latter has the requisite capacity to sue.

US membership of the Madrid Protocol may be only a few months away according to Bruce MacPherson, director of external affairs of the International Trademark Association. Thanks to pressure from US companies and the INTA, the legislation to implement membership, first considered in 1989, is nearing the end of its journey through Congress. Attempts to implement the Protocol have not been easy. It has been dogged by conflict with the EU, and lately by complications over Cuba's role.

A global campaign to overturn a US patent on basmati rice has scored a major victory with the announcement that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has thrown out 13 of 16 remaining claims from US-based RiceTec's controversial patent. John J Doll, the director of biotechnology examination at the USPTO, himself examined and rejected 13 claims from the patent. He judged that the rice lines, plants and grains that the company claimed in the application were prior art or substantially identical to basmati varieties grown in India and Pakistan, and hence could not be patented.

In three rare decisions on patent law, the Supreme Court of Canada has clarified controversial questions about the date of construction and claim language. James D Kokonis QC, Dennis SK Leung and Colin B Ingram explain

A UK court has upheld freedom of expression over privacy in the high profile case of supermodel Naomi Campbell, which interpreted the Data Protection Act for the first time.

Pursuant to the Mexican Law of Industrial Property, the owner or an authorized licensee of a registered mark must use that mark in commerce. If the mark is not used within a three year period, although it will remain in full force until its renewal time, it will be also contestable, and in consequence any interested third party could file a cancellation action against it on non-use basis.

Over half of UK companies have no system in place to protect intellectual property, according to a survey conducted by UK firm Marks & Clerk. The survey canvassed 203 companies in four sectors ? pharmaceutical, technology, engineering and financial. The survey revealed that 77% of companies believe they should protect their IP, but only 49% have a system in place to identify when they need to seek patent protection, and only 30% carry out regular IP audits.