对权利要求的保护范围是否相同的探讨

权利要求的保护范围问题贯穿了发明专利申请的始终,是发明专利的核心问题。专利法及审查指南对权利要求的保护范围问题作了详细规定。结合相关规定,通过电学领域的具体案例,对权利要求的保护范围是否相同进行了探讨,提出了笔者的观点。     

浅议电视图像领域发明专利申请中的权利要求

在发明专利申请的权利要求书的撰写过程中,为了扩大保护范围,通常会概括过宽从而导致权利要求得不到说明书的支持。结合电视图像领域的实际案例来对实质审查中的关于权利要求书得不到说明书支持的判断标准进行分析,对该领域的申请人在撰写权利要求时应注意的问题提出建议。     

如何把握涉及视频数据处理发明的审查标准——各国审查标准对我国审查实践的启示

随着我国经济的飞速发展和专利制度的进一步完善,越来越多的跨国公司在我国申请发明专利,尤其在视频数字化领域,专利申请量逐年增加.分析了视频数字化领域涉及视频数据处理发明的权利要求的特点,然后比较了美国、日本和欧洲对此类发明的审查标准和审查实践,得出了各自审查的侧重点,为我国的审查实践提供一定的借鉴意义.     

浅谈涉及用户界面的权利要求的撰写

随着计算机技术的发展,用户界面相关的发明专利申请越来越多,在审查过程中通常被质疑客体问题.从专利法的相关规定入手,基于实际的案例进行分析,对于该类权利要求的撰写提出了一些建议,对于涉及用户界面的权利要求的撰写形式进行了研究.     

语音领域涉及算法的专利申请的客体审查

语音领域的发明专利申请主要涉及语音分析或合成、语音识别、音频分析或处理,尤其是一些大学、科研院所的申请大多涉及数学理论和识别方法、换算方法,有些发明点就在于数学公式、建模的模型。在撰写时权利要求书中的客体缺陷很容易被忽略,从而导致申请无法被授权的情形,通过引用实际案例,具体分析语音领域涉及算法的专利申请的客体审查,希望对撰写此类专利申请提供帮助。     

如何撰写申请文件以利于后续修改

首先结合中国专利法的相关法律条款解释了发明专利申请保护范围的判定和发明专利申请文件的修改条件;同时结合经验丰富的公司申请人的撰写方式给出较好的撰写方式的实例.然后,根据在多年进行发明专利申请的实质审查过程中总结出的已有公司的较好的申请文件的撰写经验,对国内的发明专利申请人提出发明专利的权利要求书和说明书的撰写方式建议.     

专业领域软件的代码审查方法研究

代码审查是发现软件的缺陷、保证软件的质量的重要手段.现今对特定专业领域的软件进行代码审查时一般采用传统的代码审查方法,但传统的代码审查方法仍存在一些问题,基于此,提出了一种专业领域软件的代码审查方法.结果表明,该方法在实际的工程应用中能够有效地发现软件的缺陷,显著地提高软件测试效率.     

对不明显缺乏单一性专利申请审查方式的思考

通过一个实际审查中的案例,对权利要求之间具有不明显单一性缺陷的专利申请的审查方式进行了分析讨论,并讨论了对于第一项独立权利要求和其从属权利要求具有授权前景,而其他独立权利要求与该有授权前景的权利要求之间缺乏单一性的专利申请的审查方式存在的问题,进一步对该部分内容提出了思考和建议,以便在实际审查工作中提供参考.     

从图像领域疑难案例看客体审查

对于涉及人为制定规则的发明专利申请,其权利要求中往往既包含了技术特征也包含了人为制定的规则,导致审查员在分析技术手段、技术问题和技术效果时存在一定的困惑.从具体案例出发,通过对不同观点的对比分析,剖析客体审查的判断尺度.     

浅谈语音领域的专利保护客体问题

在语音领域发明专利申请的审查过程中,经常需要对其主题是否属于专利法保护的客体进行审查。首先给出了在判断保护客体时的基本思路,结合具体案例探讨存在的问题,并给出相应的建议解决方法。     

Festo, schmesto! [patent law and the doctrine of equivalents]

Does a recent US Supreme Court decision in the case of Festo Corp. versus Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd., expand or limit the rights of patent holders to sue copycats? This article discusses the "doctrine of equivalents," which allows the patent holder to expand a patent beyond its literal terms to cover subject matter it doesn't expressly mention. At its heart are two premises: first, it is difficult to capture the full scope of technical innovation in words; and second, some people are wiseguys. No matter how carefully a patent claim is worded, no matter how well it appears to cover an invention, there will always be those who will search eagerly for the loophole, a way to circumvent language and avoid infringement. Patent law rewards innovation with exclusivity for a limited time period. But the reason patents are printed and published is to encourage still further innovation. The problem arises when someone slyly avoids a patent's language without contributing anything new-in effect, appropriating the benefits of an invention without enriching the art. Ultimately, the doctrine of equivalents plays a marginal role in patent law. That's because reasonably well-written patent claims are not, in the main, easy to avoid if the benefits of the invention are to be retained. Courts apply the doctrine to catch the occasional wiseguy while defending the certainty patent claims are supposed to provide. The Supreme Courts latest adjustment notwithstanding, that role is likely to continue     

A do-it-yourself approach to securing patent protection, part 1 in a series on protecting your inventions with limited resources

This series will present some procedural guidance for inventors and entrepreneurs who would otherwise either not pursue protection for their inventions, or would file a patent application pro se without the input of a qualified patent practitioner. Having a professional patent practitioner draft and file a patent application can be beyond the budget of many inventors. The topics discussed in the series will focus exclusively on patents and will not cover other forms of intellectual property (IP) such as trademarks and copyrights. The series will provide tips for such inventors in order to minimize the risk of: devaluing an invention, jeopardizing chances of allowance of a patent during prosecution, having a patent application being deemed unpatentable or lacking enablement, or having a patent being deemed unenforceable against infringement. The material presented here is meant to be informational and in no way serves as legal advice. Individuals who are interested in discussing their innovations in detail should consult a qualified patent practitioner. Part 1 of the series explores the issues involved in securing provisional patent protection at the nascent stage of invention. This is a way to defer costs for inventors and entrepreneurs. I explain the Provisional Patent Application (PPA), patentability requirements including what defines a patentable invention, how to search for patentability, and a suitable PPA disclosure.     

国内LED显示专利信息检索与行业协会专利统计情况简述

文章通过对国内LED显示应用领域专利信息的检索,介绍了按不同关键词和不同检索方法所检索到的国内LED显示发明专利、实用新型专利和外观设计专利的数量等情况;又通过行业协会LED显示应用专利情况的统计和相关数据的整理,对协会会员单位目前显示应用专利的情况作了分析和探讨。     

微型传声器中国专利申请状况分析

以CNABS数据库公开微型传声器技术领域相关的专利文献为基础,对中国的微型传声器技术的专利申请进行了统计分析,并介绍了几个主要申请人的重点发明专利,为中国传声器行业的技术发展提出建议,同时对业界人员专利布局工作给出参考。     

Intellectual property and patent abstracts

The author explains how examiners at the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) treat applications for inventions that seem to violate accepted scientific principles. In order to be entitled to a patent, an invention must be useful, novel, and non-obvious. In order to obtain a patent, the inventor must submit a specification that describes the invention in sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can make and use the invention (without having to engage in undue experimentation). Inventions that indeed violate the laws of physics are not patentable because: (1) they are not useful (i.e., they do not work); and (2) the inventor is unable to properly describe how to make and use a device that violates the laws of physics. However, it is not always so easy to separate those inventions that do indeed violate the laws of physics from those inventions that only appear to violate such laws. Examiners at the PTO use a document called the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) when examining an application for a patent. The author reproduces two of the more pertinent sections of the MPEP that relate to the issue of determining whether an invention is useful.     

我国电子产品专利预警及其知识产权立体保护设计

2002年，2003年专利统计中，我国电子产品专利申请和授权总量高于国外，形成范围较广的保护空间，但以实用新型为主，发明量较少，没有占居核心垄断地位，处于竞争的劣势。国外在中国的电子产品专利中，发明专利授权量高于国内，形成在电信技术．基本电子元件领域在国内的技术法权垄断。通过作品专利化、商标专利化、专利商标化、作品商标化形成电子产品立体保护，来弥补核心竞争能力的不足。     

Down and out in Ham lake

This paper presents a cautionary tale to all inventors who surrender their patents in return for funding. The paper relates the experience of Corliss Orville Burandt, who claims to have invented a method called variable valve timing. Burandt discovered that Honda's intelligent VTEC engine used a technique that he believes is identical to his patent. He also claims that four other major auto companies have recently filed for patents on concepts that would infringe his patents. Unfortunately, Burandt found out that he didn't own the patents and that Investment Rarities Inc., which had initially provided funds to develop his inventions, had failed to pay the US Patent and Trademark Office in maintenance fees that were due on the 12 patents Burandt had assigned to the company in exchange for funding. This case should serve as a lesson to all inventors not to assign the patent to their development partners, but instead to give them an exclusive license. That way, the inventor maintains control over the invention, can monitor and ensure payment of maintenance fees, and can work language into the contract that stipulates that the exclusive license can be terminated if the licensee does not make a reasonable effort to commercialize the technology.     

对于C＋＋语言考试编程题自动评分系统的研究

为了使学生适应计算机语言考试,考核学生应用C/C＋＋编写程序的能力,实现C＋＋语言考试的计算机阅卷,提出了针对C＋＋程序上机考试的自动评分系统的构建方式与算法研究。用Windows API函数做了深入的研究与分析,对如何匹配、查找程序的关键语句进行了分析和研究。该系统对C＋＋程序上机考试的客观题和主观题的计算机自动评分采用多种的方法,完成了对C＋＋语言考试的自动评分。