Archive for the ‘News’ Category

Base de données de “dons” de brevets par différentes compagnies comme l’a fait récemment Tesla

June 17, 2014

Voir le lien suivant:

Brevets célèbres de l’histoire du cinéma

April 3, 2014

Des brevets de Disney, Lucasfilms entre autres à voir ici:

Formation gratuite en ligne sur la commercialisation de la recherche dans le domaine de la santé

January 21, 2014

Un lien à transmettre à vos contacts dans le domaine des sciences de la vie ou appareils médicaux

E-learning courses on commercialising research in the health sector:

Reportage video de la CBC sur les Patent Trolls ou Non-Practicing Entities au Canada

January 6, 2014 

Joyeuses fêtes! (Cliquer sur image pour voir une animation de dessin industriel de circonstance)

December 20, 2013


Des idées-cadeaux pour les agents de brevets dans vos vies

December 19, 2013

(Il y a des produits pour les agents de brevets (non-“attorneys”) à la fin de la liste…)

Le 5 novembre, une date d’anniversaire avec une leçon sur comment un agent de brevet décrirait une voiture

November 5, 2013

Extrait de:
(en date du 5 novembre- le fichier ne sera plus là demain)

Mais voici le brevet discuté ci-dessous:

1. The combination with a road-locomotive, provided with
suitable running gear including a propelling wheel and steering
mechanism, of a liquid hydrocarbon gas-engine of the compression
type, comprising one or more power cylinders, a suitable
liquid-fuel receptacle, a power shaft connected with and arranged
to run faster than the propelling wheel, an intermediate clutch or
disconnecting device and a suitable carriage body adapted to the
conveyance of persons or goods, substantially as

Extrait de l’article d’Art Cashin:

An Encore Presentation

On this day in 1895, a patent was issued to George B. Selden. It
was the kind of patent mere mortals could only dream of. It ranked
at or above those granted for the telephone or the electric light.
What was it that Selden had invented that was so great – – it was
the automobile – – only Selden didn’t invent it.

Selden was a clever chap who had noticed the products being
produced by the Duryea Brothers and Ransom Olds, in the preceding
two decades. He had even read of the work of Karl Benz in

Since he was a patent attorney, he devised a broad based patent to
cover all future automobiles. As the 1900’s began, autos began to
sell. Selden grabbed some Wall Street buddies and began to sue the
early producers. Each one caved and Selden’s Association of
Licensed Automobile Manufacturers began to get a royalty from

In 1903, a guy named Henry Ford applied for membership. Hoping to
up the ante, they turned Ford down. Ford (my hero – – he once said
the role of your body is to carry your brain around) choose to keep
making cars. For six years, they fought in Federal Court. Then a
judge said Selden’s patent was valid. The effect was electric.
Everybody, including GM, decided to pay. Selden and the Wall Street
types, sensing billions, magnanimously offered to let Mr. Ford pay
at the old rate.

Ford told them where to place their offer and took them to Appeals
Court, claiming the patent was too broad and counterclaiming they
owned him and other damages. Two years later a judge with a sense
of humor and a way with words held that Ford was right. Knowing
when to cut and run (and save damages), the Selden/Wall Street
Crowd puppied up. The automobile business was wide open and Ford
became a multi-billionaire.

To celebrate pull in to the Pierce Arrow Drive-In Tavern and
winterize with as much anti-freeze as you like. But don’t put both
feet on the running board.

Rétablissement de brevets abandonnés “intentionnellement” aux États-Unis

October 9, 2013

Jurisprudence US: licences hydrides de brevets

July 19, 2013

Résumé de

Kimble v. Marvel Enter., Inc.

Court: U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Docket: 11-15605 Opinion Date: July 16, 2013
Judge: Callahan

Areas of Law: Intellectual Property, Patents

Plaintiff sued Marvel for patent infringement and breach of contract, claiming that it had used his ideas in developing a Spider-Man role-playing toy called the "Web Blaster" without compensating him. The parties subsequently agreed to settle the case while appeals were pending and executed a Settlement Agreement. Thereafter, Marvel entered into a licensing agreement with Hasbro giving it the right to produce the Web Blaster. At issue was the calculation of royalties for subsequent iterations of the Web Blaster. The court joined its sister circuits in holding, pursuant to Brulotte v. Thys Co., that a so-called "hybrid" licensing agreement encompassing inseparable patent and non-patent rights was unenforceable beyond the expiration date of the underlying patent, unless the agreement provided a discounted rate for the non-patent rights or some other clear indication that the royalty at issue was in no way subject to patent leverage. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Marvel, concluding that plaintiff could not recover royalties under the Settlement Agreement beyond the expiration date of the patent at issue.

Description des problèmes avec le projet “paperless” au USPTO

July 18, 2013

Un article du New Yorker

Les brevets avaient mené au développement du premier photocopieur!

April 17, 2013

Un extrait intéressant d’un site décrivant l’histoire de Xerox :

Upon graduating from high school, Carlson worked his way through a nearby junior college where he majored in chemistry. He then entered California Institute of Technology, and was graduated in two years with a degree in physics.

More problems faced Carlson as he entered a job market shattered by the developing Depression. He applied to eighty-two firms, and received only two replies before landing a $35-a-week job as a research engineer at Bell Telephone Laboratories in New York City. As the Depression deepened, he was laid off at Bell, worked briefly for a patent attorney, and then secured a position with the electronics firm of PR. Mallory & Co. While there, he studied law at night, earning a law degree from New York Law School. Carlson was eventually promoted to manager of Mallory’s patent department.

“I had my job,” he recalled, “but I didn’t think I was getting ahead very fast. I was just living from hand to mouth, and I had just gotten married. It was kind of a struggle, so I thought the possibility of making an invention might kill two birds with one stone: It would be a chance to do the world some good and also a chance to do myself some good.”

As he worked at his job, Carlson noted that there never seemed to be enough carbon copies of patent specifications, and there seemed to be no quick or practical way of getting more. The choices were limited to sending for expensive photo copies, or having the documents retyped and then reread for errors.

A thought occurred to him: Offices might benefit from a device that would accept a document and make copies of it in seconds. For many months Carlson spent his evenings at the New York Public Library reading all he could about imaging processes. He decided immediately not to research in the area of conventional photography, where light is an agent for chemical change, because that phenomenon was already being exhaustively explored in research labs of large corporations.

Ce qui a mené au brevet suivant : et au développement de la compagnie Xerox, etc. (Voir le premier lien pour l’histoire complète)

Scintillae of inventiveness or imagination #3

December 14, 2012

Articles repérés cette semaine:

-Dessins industriels US: bientôt valables pendant 15 ans + changement sur le minimum requis pour avoir une date de dépôt US : revendications ne sont plus nécessaires -

- New free chemical patent search tool:

-Infos sur brevet unitaire en Europe :

-Factsheet on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms                         Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms

-IP E-learning tools for SMEs  – To access this tool, please click here

-“Agreeing a Price for Intellectual Property Rights” Booklet; to freely download the booklet, click here.


Comparaison de pratique pour le critère “inventive step” au Japon/Chine/Corée du Sud

April 13, 2012

Voir le lien: 

Un nouveau test en 3 parties pour la nouveauté de brevets au Canada?

March 15, 2012

Wenzel Downhole Tools Ltd v National-Oilwell Canada Ltd 2011 FC 1323, 98 CPR(4th) 155, Snider J

L’extrait pertinent du test:

The first branch of the test is disclosure. The question of disclosure raises three distinct sub-issues:

1. Does the prior art contain the subject matter defined by the ‘630 claims?
2. Was the prior art disclosed before the ‘630 Patent claim date?
3. Was the disclosure of the subject matter of the ‘630 Patent available to the public?
[95] Only if the answer to all of these questions is affirmative, will the Defendants be able to establish the first branch of the test set out in Sanofi-Synthelabo, above.

Sondage: Réputation de la Chine en matière de protection de la PI-taux net de satisfaction de 20% comparé à 60% pour les États-Unis

December 5, 2011

Voir les résultats de sondage effectué par le cabinet Allen & Overy auprès de compagnies multinationales

Voir les pages 8, 9 et 13 du document suivant pour un graphique/article  intéressants

Voir un résumé du rapport dans le South China Morning Post

Le groupe produit également une carte interactive intéressante au niveau mondial: investment perspectives

Article intéressant sur comment les brevetés d’origine chinoise sont favorisés lors de litiges en Chine

November 21, 2011

Un article référé par mon père de 84 ans :)

L’article a aussi des références intéressantes sur les chances de gagner en litige pour les brevetés en Allemagne, UK, etc.

Voir l’article de The Gazette

OMPI passe au feu – fermeture pour deux jours

October 27, 2011

Fire At WIPO Premises Forces Two-Day Shutdown 

Confirmation sur le site de l’OMPI:

Photos des camions de pompiers:

Pour votre culture générale: le USPTO est passé au feu qqes fois également:
(et a causé une renumérotation des brevets suite à un des plus grands feux)

Cour d’appel fédérale commente sur les arguments d’avocats en litige de brevets

August 30, 2011

Voir:  Phostech Lithium Inc. v. Valence Technology Inc. 2011 FCA 237

Extraits pertinents:

27]           Phostech’s argument with respect to claim 3 of the ‘115 Patent is a classic lawyer’s argument, namely that where a draftsman (or patent agent) uses different words, different meanings are intended. Counsel for Phostech put before us a table showing the various expressions used in the patent such as “ source of [element]”, “[element]-containing compound”, “[element] compound”, the point of which was to underline that the drafters of the patent referred only to “carbon” and did not include the qualifying words used in relation to other substances. From this, Phostech argued that where the patent refers to carbon, it means carbon in a pure form as opposed to some other compound which may be a source of carbon.

[34]           The fact that a lawyer, using the usual rules of interpretation, might come to a different conclusion, is of no consequence. The patent is not directed to lawyers but to persons skilled in the art. This principle is anchored in the language of the Patent Act itself (R.S.C. 1985, c. P-4, s. 27(3)(b) [emphasis added])

Extrait intéressant de décision du Commissaire sur utilité

March 8, 2011
Voir:  Re Immunex Corporation Patent Application No. 583,988
[74] Moreover, Consolboard Inc. v. MacMillan Bloedel (Saskatchewan) Ltd. (1981), 56 C.P.R. (2d) 145 (S.C.C.) informs us that, so long as utility would be apparent to the skilled person, neither the description nor the claims need explicitly mention the utility of a novel product claimed as such.

Une demande de brevet potentiellement utile pour le 14 février ou un exemple de demande de brevet comme outil de marketing…

February 10, 2011

Apparemment la société Harlequin a déposé une demande de brevet sur un baiser.  La demande de brevet ne semble pas encore publiée par le USPTO ou autre bureau de brevets, mais est disponible pour consultation sur le site suivant.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.