A Push for European Patent Reform: There is pressure from within Europe and from the United States to permit publication of research results before a patent is applied for

Science ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 227 (4689) ◽  
pp. 926-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. DICKSON
1992 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Feick

ABSTRACTThis paper tries to integrate and generalise research results from selected comparative policy studies in the fields of economic, social, educational, environmental and health and safety policies. The countries included are Britain, Sweden and the United States. The concepts of institutional and organisational structure, culture orientation and policy style are applied in order to develop descriptive taxonomies to suggest how these factors might influence ultimate policy outputs.


2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Mark B. Wilson ◽  
Daniel Alge

Many jurisdictions, including the European Patent Office (EPO), have opposition proceedings in which an interested third party can challenge the validity of the claims of an issued patent. The United States Congress is considering legislation that would introduce opposition proceedings in the USA. This paper reviews the existing EPO and proposed US opposition procedures and provides practical suggestions for dealing with oppositions.


1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 567-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul R. Abramson

Measuring the southern contribution to the Democratic coalition is an important task. To measure this contribution one must choose appropriate data and the appropriate unit of analysis for studying party coalitions in the United States. Two recent studies of party coalitions use the National Election Studies to estimate the southern contribution to the Democratic party, and these studies illustrate the problems one may encounter. This note demonstrates two points. First, survey research results may lead to erroneous estimates and it is preferable, where possible, to rely upon official election statistics. Second, the contribution of demographic groups to party coalitions should be assessed within the context of the political rules that make such coalitions meaningful.


2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-87
Author(s):  
Zein J. Razem ◽  
Qais Ali Mahafzah

AbstractAttempts to harmonize patent laws worldwide have increased, leaving bits of argumentative issues untouched in the patent systems under scrutiny. However, diversity can sometimes prove desirable since majority rule is not always right and the minority wrong. Sometimes a part is more righteous than the whole. This research focuses on areas where the Jordan Patents of Invention Law, United States Patent Law, and the European Patent Convention intersect. It concludes that although most countries, including Jordan, follow a different path than that taken by the United States, it may be unnecessary for the United States to change its system in order to be in sync with the rest of the world. Thus, it may prove advantageous to have two separate systems that can provide different patent protections where humanity achieves progression and development.


1975 ◽  
Vol 1975 (1) ◽  
pp. 249-253
Author(s):  
Keith G. Hay

ABSTRACT The cleaning and rehabilitation of oiled wildlife, especially waterfowl, has been one of our most difficult environmental problems to solve. It is plagued by controversy, emotion, apathy, and a host of biological unknowns. Costs have been high and survival rates low. This paper discusses the efforts taken by organizations and individuals in recent years to reverse this trend. It assesses biological problems and outlines research results. It analyzes people problems and wildlife contingency planning and presents a review of recent accomplishments in the United States, Canada, and Great Britain.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Hozik ◽  
J.W. Wright

This study identifies differences in the scores of Jordanian and American business students on the Keirsey Temperament Sorter personality test. The test was administered to 137 students at the University of Jordan in Amman, Jordan, and Washington College in Chestertown, Maryland. The research results show that, although there are significant differences in personality traits in two of four categories, there are more similarities than differences between the traits identified by these groups of students. This indicates that the personalities and temperaments of business students in Jordan and the United States are not remarkably different.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
khoiriazulhijah

AbstractPerbedaan sistem hukum perlindungan lingkup paten di berbagai Negara,tidak hanya mengimpor investasi baru namun juga menentukan proses transfer teknologi suatu Negara. Perlindungan yang meluas menyebabkan transfer teknologi tidak mudah walaupun kurangnya perlindungan karena pemilik paten mengalami kerugian.kedua perbedaan niat tersebut menghasilkan perlunya studi komperatif tentang cangkupan perlindungan paten di Negara-negara. Ada dua masalah yang harus dijajaki, pertama apa perbedaan dan kesamaan cakupan perlindungan paten dalam peraturan negara dan yang kedua bagaimana sistem hukum mempengaruhi kejadian yang berbeda? A.INTRODUCTIONPerkembangan Teknologi suatu Negara,tidak lepas dari aspek perlindungan hak paten yang berlaku pada Negara tersebut. Negara jepang sebagai contoh, adalah Negara yang dikenal paling maju teknologinya.Semula Negara ini banyak mencontoh teknologi Negara-negara Eropa dan Amerika, namun dalam perkembangan yang kita ketahui akhir-akhir ini justru jepanglah yang menjadi kiblat dari Negara-negara lain termasuk Eropa dan Amerika.B.CONTENT1.Perlindungan paten di Negara-Negara Eropa Konvensi Paten Eropa, Undang-Undang Paten Jerman, Amerika Serikat, dan Jepang, dalam makalah “Comparative Study on the Japanese, the United States and the European Patent Systems”, oleh Japan Patent Office Asia-Pacific Industrial Property Center di Jepang belum lama ini (tahun 2001), bila ditelaah banyak mengungkap persamaan/perbedaan perlindungan paten negara-negara tersebut. Beberapa pasal konvensi dan undang-undang negara dimaksud, memperkaya isi tulisan ini.C.CONCLUSIONPerlindungan paten baik bagi negara-negara Eropa yang mengikuti Konvensi Paten Eropa, Jepang maupun Indonesia memiliki persamaan dalam memberikan perlindungan paten berdasarkan prinsip first-to-file, yang berbeda dengan Amerika Serikat berdasarkan prinsip first-to-invent. Sekalipun Amerika Serikat menggunakan prinsip first-to-invent, tetapi Amerika Serikat juga mengatur syarat perlindungan sebagaimana negara-negara Eropa, Jepang dan Indonesia yang berupa penemuan baru, mengandung langkah inventif, dan dapat diterapkan dalam industri. D.DISCUSSIONIndonesia yang sekarang ini dalam undang-undangnya masih mengatur secara umum lingkup perlindungan hak paten, disarankan mengikuti prilaku hakim pengadilan Jepang yang mengadopsi doktrin file wrapper estoppel dan equivalent sebagaimana berlaku di Amerika Serikat. Hal ini didasarkan pertimbangan bahwa doktrin yang dimaksud memberikan keseimbangan pada perlindungan pemegang paten, di samping perlindungan kepentingan negara dalam proses alih teknologi. E.REFERENCE [1]O. M. Febriani and A. S. Putra, “Sistem Informasi Monitoring Inventori Barang Pada Balai Riset Standardisasi Industri Bandar Lampung,” J. Inform., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 90–98, 2014.[2]A. S. Putra, “Paperplain: Execution Fundamental Create Application With Borland Delphi 7.0 University Of Mitra Indonesia,” 2018.[3]A. S. Putra, “2018 Artikel Struktur Data, Audit Dan Jaringan Komputer,” 2018.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
khoiriazulhijah

AbstractPerbedaan sistem hukum perlindungan lingkup paten di berbagai Negara,tidak hanya mengimpor investasi baru namun juga menentukan proses transfer teknologi suatu Negara. Perlindungan yang meluas menyebabkan transfer teknologi tidak mudah walaupun kurangnya perlindungan karena pemilik paten mengalami kerugian.kedua perbedaan niat tersebut menghasilkan perlunya studi komperatif tentang cangkupan perlindungan paten di Negara-negara. Ada dua masalah yang harus dijajaki, pertama apa perbedaan dan kesamaan cakupan perlindungan paten dalam peraturan negara dan yang kedua bagaimana sistem hukum mempengaruhi kejadian yang berbeda? A.INTRODUCTIONPerkembangan Teknologi suatu Negara,tidak lepas dari aspek perlindungan hak paten yang berlaku pada Negara tersebut. Negara jepang sebagai contoh, adalah Negara yang dikenal paling maju teknologinya.Semula Negara ini banyak mencontoh teknologi Negara-negara Eropa dan Amerika, namun dalam perkembangan yang kita ketahui akhir-akhir ini justru jepanglah yang menjadi kiblat dari Negara-negara lain termasuk Eropa dan Amerika.B.CONTENT1.Perlindungan paten di Negara-Negara Eropa Konvensi Paten Eropa, Undang-Undang Paten Jerman, Amerika Serikat, dan Jepang, dalam makalah “Comparative Study on the Japanese, the United States and the European Patent Systems”, oleh Japan Patent Office Asia-Pacific Industrial Property Center di Jepang belum lama ini (tahun 2001), bila ditelaah banyak mengungkap persamaan/perbedaan perlindungan paten negara-negara tersebut. Beberapa pasal konvensi dan undang-undang negara dimaksud, memperkaya isi tulisan ini.C.CONCLUSIONPerlindungan paten baik bagi negara-negara Eropa yang mengikuti Konvensi Paten Eropa, Jepang maupun Indonesia memiliki persamaan dalam memberikan perlindungan paten berdasarkan prinsip first-to-file, yang berbeda dengan Amerika Serikat berdasarkan prinsip first-to-invent. Sekalipun Amerika Serikat menggunakan prinsip first-to-invent, tetapi Amerika Serikat juga mengatur syarat perlindungan sebagaimana negara-negara Eropa, Jepang dan Indonesia yang berupa penemuan baru, mengandung langkah inventif, dan dapat diterapkan dalam industri. D.DISCUSSIONIndonesia yang sekarang ini dalam undang-undangnya masih mengatur secara umum lingkup perlindungan hak paten, disarankan mengikuti prilaku hakim pengadilan Jepang yang mengadopsi doktrin file wrapper estoppel dan equivalent sebagaimana berlaku di Amerika Serikat. Hal ini didasarkan pertimbangan bahwa doktrin yang dimaksud memberikan keseimbangan pada perlindungan pemegang paten, di samping perlindungan kepentingan negara dalam proses alih teknologi.


2007 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Albaugh ◽  
H. Lee Allen ◽  
Thomas R. Fox

Abstract Based on historical forest fertilization survey records, over 16 million ac were fertilized in the southeastern United States from 1969 to 2004, with the peak forest fertilizer application in 1999, when 1.59 million ac were fertilized. The 1999 applications were largely on loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.; 91%) in established stands (78%) and included both nitrogen and phosphorus, typically as urea and diammonium phosphate fertilizers, respectively. On a tonnage basis from 2000 to 2004, the average amount of forest-applied urea and diammonium phosphate represented 2.5% of those materials applied in the United States. The number of acres fertilized approximately doubled every 2 years from 1991 through 1999. This increase can be attributed to a shift in forest production interests to the southeastern United States at a time when research results were showing positive biological and economic responses to nitrogen and phosphorus applications in midrotation southern pine stands. Common application rates for nitrogen and phosphorus were 200 and 50 lb elemental nitrogen ac−1and 25 and 50 lb elemental phosphorus ac−1 for stands >2 years old and ≤2 years old, respectively. In 1994, application of elements other than nitrogen and phosphorus, including potassium, boron, and magnesium, began in response to newly available research results. Boron was applied to 30% of the total number of acres fertilized in 2004, likely because boron, when applied with urea, may reduce nitrogen volatilization.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document