www.intelproplaw.com | www.intelproplaw.com |
Re: prior art and non-disclosure[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Patent Forum ] [ FAQ ] Posted by M. Arthur Auslander on November 13, 2003 at 07:35:11: In Reply to: prior art and non-disclosure posted by Bill on November 13, 2003 at 05:52:28:
: : Pretend that there is no Mexico-US co-mingling of cultures. Taco Bell etc. is not in existence. : : Of course, I have McD sign a non-disclosure agreement. The non-disclosure agreement says I am the one who showed them the burrito and in so many words, own the rights to it (but not really, since it is not patented yet.) A strong non-disclosure agreement would read something like, "I am the one who showed McD the burrito. Before I came along, McD knew nothing about this. Therefore, if McD enters the burrito business, it must be under my license." : Now, many books suggest having the licensee (McD) pay for the patent lawyers and fees. This makes good sense to me, since I don't have an extra $10,000 right now. These same books also recommend getting the license agreement to say that the licensee (McD) must pay to sue others for infringement. The logic behind this is again, the inventors lack of funds for legal fees. : I just read another loong article, that said manufacturers typically cease royalties when infringement is discovered. This makes sense, because if the patent is weak, everyone could infringe it, making it almost worthless. : Question 1: : Suppose I get McD to sign a license agreement and they agree to pay for patent fees. I start getting rich. : In the future, someone goes to Mexico, and it is discovered that there is prior art on my burrito, and Burger King begins selling burritos. : Question 2: : Does anyone have any direct expereince with these issues. M. Arthur Auslander
|
www.intelproplaw.com |
The Intellectual Property Law Server Old Patent Forum |
www.intelproplaw.com |