Intellectual Property Forum The Intellectual Property Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The forum software has been upgraded.  New registrations are not currently permitted while we iron out any bugs and other matters.  Please report any problems you find.

Author Topic: Inventorship II  (Read 603 times)

Bill Richards

  • Lead Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 862
    • View Profile
    • Email
Inventorship II
« on: 07-17-06 at 02:53 pm »

Burroughs and Fina both mention that joint inventors must "contribute to the 'joint arrival' at at definite and permanent idea . . . ."  If A works on a problem and then stops and then B picks it up and finishes it, both can be inventors.  (Assume for now that they are.)  Yet, and here's my problem, there has been no "joint arrival".   :-/  Or, is it just an "or" in the test and not an "and".  (Along with "significant manner"?)
« Last Edit: 07-17-06 at 02:57 pm by patentpilot »
Logged
William B. Richards, P.E.
The Richards Law Firm
Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights
614/939-1488
www.wbrfirm.com

Isaac

  • Lead Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5163
    • View Profile
Re: Inventorship II
« Reply #1 on: 07-17-06 at 03:10 pm »

Quote
Burroughs and Fina both mention that joint inventors must "contribute to the 'joint arrival' at at definite and permanent idea . . . ."  If A works on a problem and then stops and then B picks it up and finishes it, both can be inventors.  (Assume for now that they are.)  Yet, and here's my problem, there has been no "joint arrival".   :-/  Or, is it just an "or" in the test and not an "and".  (Along with "significant manner"?)


Sure there has for some definition of "joint arrival".  I'm sure with some imagination you can concoct one that fits the facts.
Logged
Isaac
 



Footer

www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com

Page created in 0.074 seconds with 17 queries.