|
|
Patent Industry News - We Need your help. Please submit news articles
Anything you feel that may be informative or of value to other IP professionals that you would like placed on the Patent Industry News Board, please attach in a Word format and send to: jobs@supreme.net.au This site gets up to 4,000 hits per month and the news page get up to 2,700 visits per month. Give us your articles of interest and you will get free exposure. September 2011 First Inventor to File System, Now Law in the US. On September 16, 2011, President Obama signed The America Invents Act (the "Act") into law from Thomas Jefferson High School of Science and Technology in These are a few of the many historic changes to the patent system signed into law today. News items sent to PAJB by: Lowrey Blixseth LLP; lawlb.com July 2011 IPR protection in New Regulations on Online Transactions It was revealed at the conference that Sword Action Meanwhile, the Ministry of Public Security carried out a “sword action” in which more than 5,400 IPR cases involving counterfeits valued at RMB 4.5 billion were investigated from November 2010 to March 2011. Among them, only 183 cases were online infringement cases, but the value of the counterfeits was estimated to be about RMB 500 million, which would be upwards of 10% of the total value. At another press conference held on 12 April 2011, the Ministry of Public Security announced the following 10 cases as typical cases in the “Sword Action”: 1. Shanghai Public Security Bureau uncovered "Luobo home", where the suspects produce pirated Windows XP and Windows 7 software to make illegal profits; 2. Hubei Public Security Bureau cracked down on the manufacture and sale of fake drugs valued at more than RMB 90 million; 3. Guangdong Public Security Bureau seized counterfeited printers sold under the famous brands of “HP”, “CANON”; “LEGEND” with an illegal turnover of RMB 6.2 million; 4. Several Public Security Bureaus jointly cracked down on fake high-grade cosmetics valued at about RMB 20 million, sold internationally; 5. Jiangsu Public Security Bureau uncovered sales of counterfeiting bags and clothing under famous brands of inter alia “ARMANI”, “VERSACE”, “PRADA” valued at over RMB 50 million; 6. Zhejiang Public Security Bureau cracked down on the manufacture and sale of fake fire equipment, valued at over RMB 20 million; 7. Anhui Public Security Bureau cracked down on the manufacture and sale of fake pesticides; 8. Anhui Public Security Bureau cracked down the manufacture and sale of fake “Zhonghua” pencils; 9. Hebei Public Security Bureau cracked down on the sale of fake windshields under the inter alia famous brands of “GM”, “Volkswagen”, Nissan”; 10. Revision of Milestone Laws In addition, revision to the laws governing TMs is taking place at the State Council. According to the latest draft, the revised TM law may simplify administrative proceedings such as cancelling the review of opposition, and will facilitate TM applications such as implementing of multi-class applications. Besides the above, a number of other IPR issues that the public are concerned with have been explained or discussed at the press conference. The officials’ answers indicate that the Chinese Government is making continuous efforts to crack down on infringements and create a safer business environment for IPR owners. Supplied by: Ella Cheong,
The July 2011
The USPTO and the Israeli patent office have recently announced a The USPTO will accelerate allowed Israeli applications and vice versa. With the Israeli patent office’s policy of automatically granting patents allowed in the With the Israeli patent office’s new program of accelerating patent applications initially filed in Source: http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2011/11-39.jsp and www.fwjip.com Note:
JULY 2011 I visited a firms website www.fwjip.com where I came across a very interesting article relating to the May 2011 In the past 2-3 months the Patent Attorney Job Board have been approached by several patent firms in Singapore, HK and China to assist them in recruiting patent attorneys / agents. The need has been strong for qualified attorneys with engineering backgrounds. The Asian market which faired reasonably well during the GFC, when I say they faired reasonably well, I mean they did not have the layoffs which occurred in many other countries. Now many Asian firms are looking at growth not just replacement, this is a good sign and hopefully a sign of things to come... IP Consulting Services: December 2010
The Patent Attorney Job Board have introduced a new service for Patent / Law firms. The Patent Attorney Job Board can offer qualified IP Consultants to help when you are short staffed, during the recruitment process or when you have peak workloads and need qualified people, part time or on an adhoc "hourly, daily or weekly basis" give us a call. If you have a glut of work and not in a position to employ a full time person give us a call on: +61 2 9891 2100 or email us and we will get back to you to discuss your requirements. For additional information or to see at a glance the standard of people we can offer: go to Employers and click on Patent IP Consulting Services (menu item, left side of page). The Patent Attorney Job Board supporting the IP Industry. IP Australia enhancing AusPat search service to increase efficiency for applicants and patent attorneys September 17, 2010 AusPat is an online search database hosted by IP Australia that lists Australian patent data dating back to 1920. AusPat is currently planning to roll out a new functionality dubbed “eDossier”, that will provide applicants and patent attorneys access to documents that relate to the prosecution of patent applications (dating back to 2006), and that are open for public inspection. This includes requests for examination, examination reports, responses to examination reports, amendments, and search results. The extended functionality will mitigate the need to purchase such information from IP Australia; which normally takes up to 7 days to process and will provide applicants and patent attorneys with an instant view of relevant documents and their respective status. IP Australia hopes the new system will result in greater efficiency and savings for applicants and patent attorneys. The service is expected to be launched in early 2011. www.BaxterIP.com.au Patent office fee changes September, 2010 Following a review of its fee structure and consultation with customers, IP Australia has formally increased some patent fees and introduced two new fee items as of 1 August 2010. As the increases only relate to some patent fees, all fees for trade marks, designs and plant breeder’s rights will remain the same. The most notable increases are to the patent fees associated with filing standard patent applications and national phase entry of PCT applications, which have both increased to AU$340 (if filed electronically). Other notable increases include those related to filing requests for examination of standard patents (AU$450) and innovation patents (AU$400), and those required for the International Searching Authority to perform an international search report and written opinion (AU$1900) for PCT applications. One of the new fee items introduced is a fee of AU$100 which will be payable for each additional “excess” claim in excess of twenty (20) claims introduced into a patent application after acceptance and before the patent goes to grant. This fee is in response to a practice of deleting excess claims during examination in order to minimize the acceptance fee, and then re-inserting those claims after acceptance. Information supplied by Chris Baxter. www.BaxterIP.com.au New Patents Act – Software Patent Strategy in August 2010 The uncertainty surrounding the Minister of Commerce’s announcement regarding the new Patents Act has prompted substantial debate. The new Patents Act will exclude all software from patent protection, although the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) will be charged with developing guidelines allowing for “embedded” software (http://www.jaws.co.nz/media/breaking-news-are-software-patents-in-new-zealand-a-thing-of-the-past). Putting aside whether or not software should be patentable, the immediate question is – what does this mean for those wanting patent protection for software related inventions in In the short term, not a lot. Until the new Act commences (perhaps not for several years), the status quo will remain, and computer programs will continue to be patentable in Some parties are questioning the value of proceeding with the patent process for their software related inventions if there is the potential (or even likelihood) that the new Act could exclude the subject matter of their invention from patentability. What about those patents already granted, or applications filed before the new Act comes into force? Given that the lifespan of a granted patent in Current Firstly, the current Patents Bill includes several transition provisions directed to this very issue. Essentially, the current New Zealand Patents Act 1953 will continue to apply to those granted patents and complete applications having a filing date before commencement of the new Act. The same applies to divisional applications if “the fresh patent application is given a date before that commencement”. As computer programs are patentable subject matter under the current Act, patents/complete applications which fall within the transition provisions and are directed to computer programs which: 1) embody a novel concept, and 2) have a commercially useful effect, will continue to be valid after commencement of the new Act. Complete-after-provisional applications claiming priority to an earlier priority date, but filed on or after the date of commencement will fall under the new Act. Patent applicants having a pending provisional patent application filed within one year before the new Act comes into force would be recommended to discuss filing an early complete application with their patent attorneys to take advantage of the provisions. What Software the New Act will Exclude Secondly, as other commentators have already pointed out – it is still unclear what software related inventions the new Act will actually exclude in practice. It is probable that patent attorneys will test the limitations on behalf of their clients, and the scope of protection available may not be as restricted as feared (or celebrated). Many inventors/businesses could miss out on protection they were ultimately entitled to because they chose not to patent in the face of such uncertainty. Additionally, often the underlying invention is not restricted to being expressed only in software – something businesses may not appreciate until they talk to a patent attorney. In any case, an application may be highly useful as part of your commercial strategy beyond the ability to enforce your rights after grant. It may have value for its deterrent effect, or in defining the invention and contributions of inventors when entering into dealings with other parties. Thirdly, we are talking about Summary To summarise, the patentability of software is a highly contentious issue around the world. In Computer programs are currently patentable in The proposed changes to legislation will not come into force for some time; The effect of these changes on the patentability of software is unclear; There are provisions confirming the eligibility of patentable subject matter for existing software patents/applications after the change; and Jason Tuck, James & Wells Intellectual Property 5th July 2010 Activity a foot.... Over the past 4 weeks the Patent Attorney Job Board have picked up a variety of new positions. In the US we have 8 Partner positions, 5 in Life Sciences and 3 in Engineering - Electrical and Mechanical Engineering covering California, Texas and Washington DC. A further 22 Associate / Senior Associate positions from all over the US including; Madison, SanDiego, LA, San Francisco, West Palm Beach, Palo Alto, Seattle, Irvine, Pasadena, Chicago, Cambridge, NY and DC. Candidates with a strong accademic record (top 25% of class) often have an advantage. 3 Patent Agent positions PhD Biotech and Electrical Engineering and 1 IP Attorney located in Irvine, Portland and Madison. Australia and New Zealand are also getting active, with new positions available in Brisbane, Perth, Sydney, Auckland and Wellington. Call us to get more information. At this time, not all vacancies have been placed on the Job Board. 13th May 2010 Managed Growth In a strategic move to support continued growth, the Fisher Adams Kelly Melbourne team has recently relocated to new premises in
Heading the “The relocation of our office into the heart of the city’s legal district is the culmination of an exciting few months for our team,” Mr Cale said. “This move is the latest step in the ongoing development of our business in “We are extremely excited by Neil’s appointment which will strengthen our expertise in electronics, computer software, information and communications technology, and business methods,” he said. Since establishing its Fisher Adams Kelly’s Managing Partner Dr “We are very pleased to share this news, which will directly support our client partnerships in this market,” 4th April 2010 Darby & Darby (darbylaw.com) who were established 115 years ago with offices in various states within the USA have shut their doors. To all the management and staff we wish you well. For thoughs patent / trade mark attorneys who require assistance in finding new employment we would be happy to be of assistance.
25th March 2010
A good sign that the IP Industry is on the mend. This month, the Patent Attorney Job Board has successfully placed patent / trade mark attorneys into Sydney, Perth, Hong Kong, London, York. Jobs which were deactivated have now been activated in California, Illinios and Texas in the USA, London, Leeds and Cambridge in the UK, Hong Kong, Sydney, Brisbane and Perth in Australia and Auckland in New Zealand. The past 12 - 18 months has been hard for many firms however, with the current activity it looks as though the worst is over and there is sunshine and blue sky on the horizon. 10th January 2010 We have added two new pages to the Employers section giving a brief overview of candidates seeking new opportunities and Executive Search (head-hunt) recruitment option. 11th September 2009
Thank you for your participation with our questionaire relating to recruitment / staffing requirements. Your assistance was appreciated. The results were as follows:
ANZ -
ANZ 18%, O/seas 37% Hardest hit areas: Admin 65%, Professional 26%, Technical 8%, Other 1%, Percentage of organizations who are looking at downsizing in the next 12 months: ANZ 5%, O/seas 16% Hardest hit areas: Admin 82%, Professional 0%, Technical 18%, Other 0%, Most replied: May not replace if someone leaves. Employ people in Admin 10%, Professional 70%, Technical 15%, Other 5%, ( 5% said replacement only) Percentage that will consider external HR Consulting services: 0% Percentage of People who believe the worst is over in the economic downturn: ANZ 67%, O/seas 47%, Unsure: 2% Summary of comments, 67% of ANZ organisations who responded felt the worst is over, however, only 47% of O/seas organizations felt the worst was over. The consensus of those who said the worst was not over felt it should improve by Mid 2010. Results came from: ANZ, *(ANZ -
22nd July 2009 GOOD News The global economy has put a lot of businesses on edge including patent firms. For the first time in 9 years the Patent Attorney Job Board had negative growth. Having more then 100 firms globally out of over 160 we work with who placed a freeze on recruitment, to our knowledge less then 30 reduced professional staff numbers. However, in the past 4-6 weeks we have had more then 20 of these firms lift the freeze and come to us looking for people again. This news is encouraging and the first step to recovery.
29th May 2009 Job opportunities - Status Globally - Constantly asked questions. The Patent Attorney Job Board have had many calls and emails from Patent Attorneys from all over the World asking about job opportunities and the status of the current employment market. The market seems to have faired reasonably well relating to redundencies. However, the hardest hit firms have been on the East Coast of the USA, mostly NY, Boston, DC , scatted pockets in the UK and India. In Australia, NZ, HK and Singapore about 70% of the firms have a sit on the fence and wait and see approach. The strongest markets currently are the West Coast USA, Chicago and the occassional opportunity cropping in other states including Texas. Western Australia is still expanding and we have opportunities there for qualified patent attorneys with mechanical / electrical backgrounds. The Global downturn has shaken the confidence of a few firms but we have noticed, some have seen it as an opportunity to grow their business. Questions frequently asked; Q? What opportunities are there for US patent Attorneys in HK, Singapore or China? A: They do come up from time to time however, several of the firms we deal with in HK have had bad experienced with US attorneys not being able to adjust to the different culture, work style and have unrealistic salary expectations. You do need to be committed to working in Asia, either having relatives, speaking Cantonese or Mandarin or some sort of tie to Asia would be helpful. Q? How do I go about relocating and finding a job as an attorney in Australia, UK , Europe or USA. A: The first thing you should do is contact the local (PSB) Professional Standards Board, or Associations Ie: IPTA, CIPA, APIC, AIPLA. They can give you an indication on attaining local qualifications, if you are entitled to get exemptions from various exams etc. Secondly; you should contact us to discuss current opportunities (not all jobs are advertised) and how we can best help you. Finally, you should do a search for work visa requirements for the country you seek to relocate to. Q? Will I have to pay my relocation costs? A: Generally the answer is no, however, 1. Some firms will only cover partial costs. 2. If a firm pays relocation costs they will normally put a clause into the employment contract stating if you leave with in a specified period these costs are to be reimbursed pro rata. This often applies to Visa sponsorship costs. 24th February 2009 Trade group asks US to place India under watch for piracy New Delhi (PTI): A group of American copyright trade associations has asked the US to put India, along with a dozen other nations including Pakistan and China, on its 'Priority Watch List' for intellectual property violations. The recommendation has been made by the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) -- a coalition of seven trade associations representing American copyright-based industries -- to the office of US Trade Representative. The 13 countries, which have been recommended by the IIPA to be placed in 'Priority Watch List' in 2009, include Argentina, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Egypt, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, the Philippines, Russia and Thailand. In its report on India to the USTR, the IIPA has said that "piracy, physical, Internet and over mobile devices worsened in 2008". "With the US economy shedding jobs at an alarming rate, our government needs to redouble it efforts to stem massive global theft of US-copyrighted works in physical form and on the Internet," IIPA said in a statement. "Piracy causes significant economic losses to our country, undermining industries and companies that historically have generated new jobs at a rate two to three times greater than that of our economy as a whole," it noted. According to IIPA, India suffered an estimated trade loss of 1.09 billion dollars in 2008 due to copyright piracy. The same stood at 1.19 billion dollars in the year-ago period. It also pointed out that in India, "while pockets of some progress can be in the enforcement system, it remains ineffective to deter piracy". Placing a trading partner country of the US under the 'watch list' indicates that there are particular problems with respect to intellectual property rights protection, enforcement or market access for people relying on IP. Further, nations coming under the 'Priority Watch List' would be the main focus of bilateral attention related to the problematic areas. The member associations of the Washington-based IIPA represent more than 1,900 US companies producing and distributing materials protected by copyright laws worldwide including computer and entertainment software, theatrical films, television programmes and music. The seven associations that are part of IIPA are Association of American Publishers, Business Software Alliance, Entertainment Software Association, Independent Film & Television Alliance, Motion Picture of America, National Music Publishers' Association and Recording Industry Association of America. The IIPA's submission discusses copyright piracy, the legal and enforcement reforms needed to fight it and other market access barriers in 48 countries. The IIPA's review of the 'Special 301' report for 2009 on Copyright Protection and Enforcement has asked the American government to place 39 out of the total 48 to be named to an "appropriate USTR watch list". The US government's 'Special 301' report pertains to intellectual property protection and market access issues in foreign countries. "The US creative industries -- business and entertainment software, film, television and home video entertainment, music and recording, and book and journal publishing -- are important drivers of the US economy, contributing substantially to domestic growth and employment, including over 110 billion dollars annually in revenue from foreign trade," it said. IIPA has also called for greater global law enforcement cooperation to tackle piracy. 6th December 2008 WIPO’s Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) concluded on December 5, 2008 after endorsing agreement on areas of convergence on “non-traditional marks” - such as holograms and audio marks - trademark opposition procedures, consideration of key issues relating to industrial designs, and new areas of work. Addressing delegates, WIPO Director General Francis Gurry remarked on the dynamism and constructive spirit of the SCT, noting that it is, “a very productive committee in the normative area.” He welcomed progress in work on non-traditional marks and trademark opposition procedures, noting “it is very encouraging to see that despite the wide variety of models and practices that exist in relation to opposition procedures, you have identified some areas of convergence and been able to reach a decision on these.” Mr. Gurry urged the SCT to focus renewed attention on the issue of designs which, for historical reasons, has not been at the forefront of intellectual property policy-making considerations. He underlined the importance of industrial designs as a means of distinguishing or differentiating products which offer essentially identical functional features. He noted that, for products which bring a new technology to the market, design is a key means of communicating how the technology will work. 11th November 2008 Some 200 participants, including government representatives from fifty nations, joined World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Director General Francis Gurry at a ceremony in Lisbon on October 31, 2008 marking the 50th anniversary of the adoption of an international agreement that facilitates the international protection of appellations of origin. Mr. Gurry noted the importance of geographical indications as a means of differentiating products within an increasingly globalized and ever-more standardized market place. He further underlined the enormous potential that geographical indications offer, in particular to developing countries, in terms of allowing them to reap the benefits of added value based on unique characteristics of certain products originating in these countries, including products derived from traditional knowledge. Mr. Gurry urged member states to demonstrate the same pioneering spirit and determination as that of the great Portuguese explorers in advancing the future development of the Lisbon System.
The Lisbon Agreement on the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration, adopted in Lisbon on October 31, 1958, provides an international legal framework with a large degree of flexibility for its implementation by member states without impinging on the effectiveness of protection accorded to geographical indications registered internationally.
|
