scholarly journals PROTECTION OF APPLICABLE INVENTION PATENT LAW BASED ON THE TRACTS OF PATENT COOPERATION IN THE COMPUTER FIELD

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andika carsya nafebra
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Extensible Markup Language ◽  
Markup Language ◽  
Presidential Decree ◽  
Extensible Markup

Very rapid technological development, especially in the field of computers resulted in form legal protection not only through patent protection against hardware but also patents on computer programs. Developments in developed countries have a tendency to patent protection that reaches protection against the formulation of algorithms even programming languages as supporting parts of computer programs such as Extensible Markup Language (abbreviated as XML), while in Indonesia, computer programs themselves are not objects of patent protection. Based on this, the author conducted a research in the form of a thesis with the aim to determine whether Extensible markup language can be an object protected by a patent based on Law No. 14 of 2001 concerning Patents in Indonesia in the case of an XML Patent registered in the United States registered with number 5,787,449 which has just become a dispute in the court in the United States between i4i and Microsoft and how it impacts after a verdict has stated that there has been a violation of an XML patent in another country ... The method used in this research is analytical descriptive method with a normative legal approach. the research conducted was library research and supported by field research through interview instruments. A Programming Language such as Extensible Markup Language cannot be an object that is protected by a Patent Law in Indonesia, the only protection for XML is indirectly protected by Patents, namely through the Treaty of the SamaPaten based on Presidential Decree No. 16 of 1996 where patents can be registered for regional protection fellow WIPO member countries. The existence of a computer program with the extensible markup language feature that has violated patents in the United States in relation to Presidential Decree Number 16 of 1997 in Indonesia does not have executorial power as it applies state-limited patents, except that XML has been registered through PCT Patent protection against XML is possible. By considering priority rights which are limited to retroactive conditions when the patent registration is first registered at least in one other country outside Indonesia.

scholarly journals JAWABAN UTS

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angga Carya Nashara
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Extensible Markup Language ◽  
Markup Language ◽  
Presidential Decree ◽  
Extensible Markup

Developments in developed countries have a tendency to patent protection that reaches protection against the formulation of algorithms even programming languages as supporting parts of computer programs such as Extensible Markup Language (abbreviated as XML), while in Indonesia, computer programs themselves are not objects of patent protection. Based on this, the author conducted a research in the form of a thesis with the aim to determine whether Extensible markup language can be an object protected by a patent based on Law No. 14 of 2001 concerning Patents in Indonesia in the case of an XML Patent registered in the United States registered with number 5,787,449 which has just become a dispute in the court in the United States between i4i and Microsoft and how it impacts after a verdict has stated that there has been a violation of an XML patent in another country ... The method used in this research is analytical descriptive method with a normative legal approach. the research conducted was library research and supported by field research through interview instruments. A Programming Language such as Extensible Markup Language cannot be an object that is protected by a Patent Law in Indonesia, the only protection for XML is indirectly protected by Patents, namely through the Treaty of the SamaPaten based on Presidential Decree No. 16 of 1996 where patents can be registered for regional protection fellow WIPO member countries. The existence of a computer program with the extensible markup language feature that has violated patents in the United States in relation to Presidential Decree Number 16 of 1997 in Indonesia does not have executorial power as it applies state-limited patents, except that XML has been registered through PCT Patent protection against XML is possible. By considering priority rights which are limited to retroactive conditions when the patent registration is first registered at least in one other country outside Indonesia.

scholarly journals APLICATION OF THE PRINCIOLE OF EQUIVALENTS IN THE RESOLUTION OF PATENT DISPUTES: ANALYSIS OF FOREIGN CASE LAW

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Олена Штефан
Keyword(s):  
Patent Protection ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Principle Of Equivalence ◽  
Doctrine Of Equivalents ◽  
The Doctrine Of Equivalents

Currently, the development of a modern economy is based on the rapid development of the latest achievements of science and technology, which in turn are the dominant indicators of state development. Globally, economic globalization and trade liberalization are accelerating, leading not only to the international division of labor, the expansion of markets and the corresponding increase in production, but also to an even greater intensification of competition, increasing the need for innovation and their sound legal protection. The principle (doctrine) of equivalence, which the courts apply in the event of patent disputes, is inextricably linked to these processes. The article reveals the essence and specifics of applying the principle of equivalents by studying the specialized literature and conducting comparative legal analysis of foreign jurisprudence.Despite the fact that the principle of equivalence has attracted the attention of many experts in the field of patent law, however, no criteria and approaches have been developed to put it into practice. An analysis of the literature indicates that researchers focus their attention on determining the principle of equivalence.As a result of the analysis of doctrinal approaches to determining the principle of equivalence, it is concluded that at the legislative level there is no differentiation of features (elements), but there is an indication of the identity of the feature as equivalent. Therefore, the substitution of the characteristic (element) indicated in the claims by the equivalent may be recognized as equivalent from the technical point of view and not from the legal position. Usually, the principle (doctrine) of equivalents is applied after the grant of the patent, and the possibility of assigning features (elements) to equivalents can be evaluated by the real technical means that appeared after the grant of the patent.The principle of equivalents or the doctrine of equivalents is a legal doctrine that was developed in the United States of America in 1850-1860 to counteract imitation, substitution of minor or minor components of a patented invention, while maintaining its other essential identity, to avoid liability.In Germany, the courts have widely used the principle of equivalents in interpreting the formula when dealing with patent infringement cases. In England, the doctrine of equivalents was not used, and the traditional British approach to determining the scope of protection was to interpret the claims literally. The analysis of the jurisprudence of foreign countries on the application of the principle of equivalence in the resolution of patent disputes allows us to draw the following conclusions: the application of the principle of equivalence in resolving the question of the scope of patent protection of inventions strikes a balance between the fair protection of the exclusive rights of the patentee and a certain variation of the elements of the claims by third parties, which will not infringe the patent rights of the patent owners; in determining the limits of patent protection by interpreting the claims, the German courts resort to the principle of equivalence when the claims contain ambiguous restrictions such as numerical ranges; in English courts, patent  infringement and patent jurisdiction issues are dealt with in a single trial, whereby judges' reasoning in the prior art has a greater influence on the understanding of the claims, in contrast to German courts that exclusively deal with patent infringement rights without touching on the aspects of the patent power.The analysis of the Ukrainian legislation has led to the conclusion that the understanding of the principle of equivalence coincides with a literal interpretation of the claims, while the new application of a known  product or process is not foreseen, since the scope of legal protection of such inventions is exhausted only by their formula, and equivalent features are not taken into account.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document