Re: Re: Re: Re: Protecting patent

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Protecting patent

Comments:
: Thanks for all the comments. Looks like this industry is probably about to get stifled. After all, the patent holder's did have the foresight to patent the "idea" a several years. It's just so unfortunate that they allowed the advancements of the general design before deciding to move on protecting their rights. I have to wonder if it was not a strategy on their part, because if they had required a royalty or licensing initially, perhaps the other manufacturer's may have chosen not to produce their devices. I find it hard to understand how such a broad patent could be allowed, but on the other hand, there was nothing similar at the time... I guess if you were the first to design a car, you could probably receive a patent for a vehicle with wheels and a motor and prevent anyone else from manufacturing anything with wheels and a motor. : : : : : : Hi, hoping for some info regarding protection of patent rights. I recall that it would be required that you actively protect your rights to a patented or risk losing the rights to the exclusive use? There is a manufacturer that owns a patent that was granted in '99 and broadened the patent this year. His revision will cover most currently distributed devices from many of his competitors and it is being said that he will sue them to halt production. Now my question is that because his old patent already covered most of his competitors devices and the patent holder did nothing to prevent them, could that mean he gave up his rights? Or could his revision give him new rights to now prevent his competitors from manufacturing the devices? I hope I made my question clear. Thanks : : : : HG, : : : : As far as I know, if a patentee (person receiving a patent grant) chooses not to exercise the right of "excluding others" from making, using, selling or importing the patented article or process into the U.S., it would NOT constitute an abandonment of the option of exercising that right on a later date. : : : : Having said all of the above, however, there are two equitable defenses to patent infringement available for defendants in cases where the patentee does not (or waits too long) enforce his patent rights. The following is just a general explanation of the defenses. You should consult with your patent attorney for more detailed information that is specific to your situation. : : : : The laches defense basically provides that if a patentee knew that others were infringing the patent and waited too long to sue for patent infringement, the patentee runs the risk of having damages barred up until the day the patent infringement suit was filed (i.e., patentee looses pre-filing damages). There is a presumption that a 6-year wait is too long. : : : : The second defense is Equitable estoppel, which requires the patentee to know of a specific infringer that is infringing the patent and then act in a manner that reassures the infringer that the patentee is not going to sue for patent infringement, AND the infringer relies upon the patentee's actions to the infringer's detriment (the infringer would be materially harmed if the patentee is later permitted to assert a claim inconsistent with the patentee's earlier conduct). The patentee's damages are barred forever as to that specific defendant. : : : : I hope this helps, X. : : : @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@2 : : : Thanks for all the info... : : : That is unfortunate. The patent in question is a very broad patent and will stifle development of improved devices. The patent holder had an approved patent dated a few years back but had updated it recently with an even broader coverage. We are afraid that their intentions are to control the market with a royalty charge to all his competitors. The patent is so broad I find it hard to comprehend how it could have been approved. It would be somewhat like Ford patenting cars with 4 wheels, doors that open outwards and run on gasoline. The patent holder says that he is actually only after a single competitor that they feel is copying their design but we are concerned that if they succeed they will use that ruling as a precedence for future cases against the rest of the industry. This could hamper future development and advancement. Could a patent cover such broad elements as say for example, a flashlight; a bulb, batteries and a switch. Or would it normally be a specific design of a flashlight? Thanks for your time... : : : : Dear H G. : : An abstract discussion will solve on problems. That is why Intellectual Property Lawyers stay in business. It is similar to any legal problem but more specialized. : : As bad as it may be on can't afford not to find legal council, that you can trust. That is why we have the Reality Check®, to try to catch the problems before they fester. : : Once you are in trouble you may not be able to afford the cost to fight, even if you are right. : : E arly L egal A dvice I s N ot E xpensive™. The longer you wait the worse it gets. : : M. Arthur Auslander : : Auslander & Thomas-Intellectual Property Law Since 1909 : : 3008 Johnson Ave., New York, NY 10463 : : 7185430266, aus@auslander.com : : ELAINE's Workshop® : : E arly L egal A dvice I s N ot E xpensive™ : : Reality Check®

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

Do not disclose any details of any patent idea. See a lawyer.
Before you post a message you must agree to the Terms of Use.