‘Enforcement of Patent Law in Civil Proceedings’ – A Conference Report on the Fifth Bi-national Seminar of TU Dresden and Charles University in Prague, 26 November 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 624-629
Author(s):  
David Petrlík ◽  
David Linke
Keyword(s):  
Automotive Industry ◽  
Conference Report ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Injunctive Relief ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Good For ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
Made In

Abstract What is the law good for if it cannot be enforced? This question is currently virulent in patent law, especially when it comes to the enforcement of injunctive relief claims. From the German perspective, a question arises: does a patent infringement have to automatically result in an injunction (as is the situation currently according to Sec. 139 of the Patent Law Act) or should exceptions be made in special cases? In particular, the automotive industry and also the IT sector demand a modernisation of this provision by introducing a proportionality test, as even the smallest patentable components in networked products can lead to the entire production being blocked in the event of a successful injunction action. Similar problems exist in US patent law. The enforceability of Czech patent law also faces challenges that need to be solved. For this reason, the fifth seminar on the topic ‘Enforcement of Patent Law in Civil Proceedings’ took place on 26 November 2019 at Charles University Prague.

Development of Bionic Design Concepts for Structure Optimisation of Forming Tools According to Production and Stress Constraints

2011 ◽  
Vol 473 ◽  
pp. 209-216
Author(s):  
Eugen Oswald ◽  
Mathias Liewald ◽  
Oliver Stephan
Keyword(s):  
Automotive Industry ◽  
Stress Constraints ◽  
Bionic Design ◽  
Design Concepts ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Current Design ◽  
The Right ◽  
Forming Tools ◽  
Current Standards ◽  
Made In

In the automotive industry, current design and dimensioning of forming tools and bearing tool components occurs according to guidelines. Possible interactions between arising loads as well as dimensioning are empirically estimated. Simulative computations, which are based on CAE-methods, are only realized in special cases. Therefore, most often current standards lead to oversized tools. In consequence, new studies based on CAE-analyses are supposed to investigate new possibilities to design forming tools and components optimized in their structure corresponding to the right distribution of forces and stress. This is made in order to increase reliability during the manufacturing process, as well as the tools’ stiffness and contribute to decrease of investment costs.

scholarly journals Should Patent Infringement Require Proof of Copying?

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Patent Law ◽  
Patent System ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Important Paper ◽  
Injunctive Relief ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
System Today ◽  
The Way

Patent law gives patent owners not just the right to prevent others fromcopying their ideas, but the power to control the use of their idea even bythose who independently develop a technology with no knowledge of thepatent or the patentee. In an important paper, Samson Vermont challengesthis received wisdom, arguing that independent invention should be adefense to patent infringement, just as it would be in copyright or tradesecret cases.Independent invention has much to recommend it. The most significantproblem facing the patent system today is the rise of so-called "patenttrolls" - entities who do not manufacture products or transfer technology,but wait and assert patents against successful companies who independentlydeveloped and manufactured the technology without knowledge of the patent.An independent invention defense would eliminate the troll problem in onefell swoop. Nonetheless, I have concerns. While I agree with Vermont thatwe can learn a great deal from the fact of independent invention, I am notyet persuaded that we can be sure that an independent invention defensewill have no undue effect on incentives. Complicating this difficultempirical question is the likelihood that the effects of an independentinvention defense would be different in different industries. Further, anindependent invention defense will significantly change any market forpatent rights that might exist or be developing today.In light of this, I suggest four steps we might take that take advantage ofVermont's insights without moving all the way to an independent inventionsystem. First, we should change the definition of willful infringement toexclude independent inventors. Second, we should adopt some form of a prioruser right. Third, we should give simultaneous invention greater credencein determining whether inventions are obvious. Finally, we might considerwhether the defendant independently invented as a factor in decidingwhether to grant injunctive relief and the conditions to impose on suchrelief.

scholarly journals Copying in Patent Law

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Turn On ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Indirect Infringement ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Ip Law ◽  
Made In

Patent law is virtually alone in intellectual property (IP) in punishingindependent development. To infringe a copyright or trade secret,defendants must copy the protected IP from the plaintiff, directly orindirectly. But patent infringement requires only that the defendant'sproduct falls within the scope of the patent claims. Not only doesn't thedefendant need to intend to infringe, but the defendant may be entirelyunaware of the patent or the patentee and still face liability.Nonetheless, copying does play a role in some subsidiary patent doctrines.For example, the question of whether patent damages should be set in orderto deter infringement depends critically on whether infringers are in factaware they are infringing, or at least that they are using the plaintiff'stechnology. Copying - or at least intent to infringe - is also an elementof claims for indirect infringement. The definition of "willfulinfringement" also turns on the question of culpability, at least in thepopular understanding of that term. More significantly, the rhetoric ofpatent law (and of IP law more generally) often seems to presuppose thatdefendants in patent cases are in fact engaged in copying. Similarly, theoutcome of public policy debates over patent reform may well turn on theperception of patent infringers as either bad actors or as innocentbusinesspeople who accidentally ran afoul of a patent.Unfortunately, no one seems to know whether patent infringement defendantsare in fact unscrupulous copyists or independent developers. In this paper,we seek to answer that question. Because copying is not an element of anypatent cause of action, courts do not normally make explicit findings as towhether defendants have copied. Instead, we turn to a variety of proxies totry to identify the subset of cases in which copying is alleged or proven.We look both at the allegations made in a random sample of complaints andat the treatment of copying in recent reported decisions. We find that asurprisingly small percentage of patent cases involve even allegations ofcopying, much less proof of copying. Copying in patent law seems to be theexception, not the rule.

scholarly journals When to Substitute a Missing Upper Lateral With a Canine: A Simplified Approach

2021 ◽  
pp. 030157422098054
Author(s):  
Renu Datta
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Segment ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Simplified Approach ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Randomized Control ◽  
The One ◽  
Individual Presentation ◽  
Available Information ◽  
Missing Tooth ◽  
Made In

Introduction: The upper lateral incisor is the most commonly missing tooth in the anterior segment. It leads to esthetic and functional imbalance for the patients. The ideal solution is the one that is most conservative and which fulfills the functional and esthetic needs of the concerned individual. Canine substitution is evolving to be the treatment of choice in most of the cases, because of its various advantages. These are special cases that need more time and effort from the clinicians due to space discrepancy in the upper and lower arches, along with the presentation of individual malocclusion. Aims and Objectives: Malocclusion occurring due to missing laterals is more complex, needing more time and effort from the clinicians because of space discrepancy, esthetic compromise, and individual presentation of the malocclusion. An attempt has been made in this article to review, evaluate, and tabulate the important factors for the convenience of clinicians. Method: All articles related to canine substitution were searched in the electronic database PubMed, and the important factors influencing the decision were reviewed. After careful evaluation, the checklist was evolved. Result: The malocclusions in which canine substitution is the treatment of choice are indicated in the tabular form for the convenience of clinicians. Specific treatment-planning considerations and biomechanics that can lead to an efficient and long-lasting result are also discussed. Conclusion: The need of the hour is an evidence-based approach, along with a well-designed prospective randomized control trial to understand the importance of each factor influencing these cases. Until that time, giving the available information in a simplified way can be a quality approach to these cases.

An IP Lawyer Walks Into a Bar

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Schruers
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Alcoholic Beverages ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
Market Strategies ◽  
Made In ◽  
Innovation Incentives

Matt Schruers demonstrates that from their earliest days as delivery mechanisms for medicines, to the era of patent elixirs, to today’s resurgence of craft cocktails, alcoholic beverages have been fruitful ground for innovation. Although cocktail recipes are unprotected by copyright or patent law, new cocktail recipes are far from scarce, despite the fact that these inventions can be freely copied and used by competitors. While culinary creations are regulated through informal norms, innovation in the mixological arts is driven by market strategies, in particular by cross-financing the investments made in easily copied information. Cocktails are often devised and sold as services, rather than products, as well as promotion for the spirits they contain. As this chapter colorfully illustrates, classic intellectual property theory often fails to account for market-based innovation incentives.

Circles on the Complex Plane

2021 ◽  
pp. 3-12
Author(s):  
A. Girsh
Keyword(s):  
Euclidean Space ◽  
Complex Plane ◽  
Euclidean Plane ◽  
Complex Space ◽  
Radical Center ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Different Dimensions ◽  
The Given ◽  
Made In

The Euclidean plane and Euclidean space themselves do not contain imaginary elements by definition, but are inextricably linked with them through special cases, and this leads to the need to propagate geometry into the area of imaginary values. Such propagation, that is adding a plane or space, a field of imaginary coordinates to the field of real coordinates leads to various variants of spaces of different dimensions, depending on the given axiomatics. Earlier, in a number of papers, were shown examples for solving some urgent problems of geometry using imaginary geometric images [2, 9, 11, 13, 15]. In this paper are considered constructions of orthogonal and diametrical positions of circles on a complex plane. A generalization has been made of the proposition about a circle on the complex plane orthogonally intersecting three given spheres on the proposition about a sphere in the complex space orthogonally intersecting four given spheres. Studies have shown that the diametrical position of circles on the Euclidean E-plane is an attribute of the orthogonal position of the circles’ imaginary components on the pseudo-Euclidean M-plane. Real, imaginary and degenerated to a point circles have been involved in structures and considered, have been demonstrated these circles’ forms, properties and attributes of their orthogonal position. Has been presented the construction of radical axes and a radical center for circles of the same and different types. A propagation of 2D mutual orthogonal position of circles on 3D spheres has been made. In figures, dashed lines indicate imaginary elements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document