www.intelproplaw.com | www.intelproplaw.com |
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Protecting patent[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Patent Forum ] [ FAQ ] Posted by HG on July 30, 2003 at 08:07:43: In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Protecting patent posted by M. Arthur Auslander on July 30, 2003 at 03:05:32:
I can post a link to the patent but unless you are familiar with the industry, it may be meaningless. The basic idea was patented but the new devices are much different from the patent holders device, actually much better than the patent holders design and much more popular... You will then see how broad the patent is and how I relate it to my examples.. : : 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. : : : : : : : 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 : : : : : : M. Arthur Auslander : : M. Arthur Auslander :
|
www.intelproplaw.com |
The Intellectual Property Law Server Old Patent Forum |
www.intelproplaw.com |