Tag Archives: patents

‘Generalissimo Francisco Franco is Still Dead!’* At least insofar as patent licensing goes.  On June 22 the Supreme Court decided yet another patent case – this one relating to patent royalties after the patent expires.  In 1964, the Supreme Court in the Brulotte case determined that even with a contract, a patent owner cannot collect royalties for […]

Google is running what it calls a ‘patent purchase promotion.’  From May 8 through May 22, 2015, you can offer to sell your issued U.S. patent to Google.  You must provide the patent number, contact information and a take-it-or-leave-it price along with the submission contract.  Google will let you know if it is interested by […]

The PTO intended that its secret Sensitive Application Warning System (‘SAWS’) program would avoid embarrassment to the agency by requiring additional layers of review for potentially controversial patent applications.  The program had exactly the opposite effect and the patent community harshly criticized the PTO for the secret and arbitrary nature of the program.  The PTO […]

  The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issues both ‘utility’ and ‘design’ patents.  A ‘utility’ patent protects how something works (e.g., the better mousetrap).  A ‘design’ patent protects the appearance of the thing (e.g., a mousetrap bait that resembles cheese).  Design patent law in the U.S. is about to change.  The U.S. has taken the […]

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has a secret Sensitive Application Warning System (‘SAWS’) program for extra review of patent applications where action might embarrass the agency.  The problem is how the program functions and which applicants and applications are subject to SAWS are all secret.  We know only the broadest guidelines for the program […]

We’ll start with the conclusion: don’t use your invention in public until AFTER you file a patent application. Back to the beginning:  Under the patent statute, a ‘public use’ of an invention prior to filing a patent application will destroy U.S. patent rights to the invention.  Before March 16, 2013, the inventor had one year […]

In the not-so-slow death spiral of software patents in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Alice v CLS Bank, another trial court has determined that a patent for software should not have been issued because the software addressed by the patent is not the kind of invention eligible for patenting.  In the case of […]