VPATAPP Alert_Patent litigation as a branding tool: Huawei v Samsung

Patent litigation as a branding tool: Huawei v Samsung

An IPKat update

http://ipkitten.blogspot.in/2016/07/patent-litigation-as-branding-tool.html

VPATAPP Alert_7 things to know about filing patents in Japan

IPWatchdog alert

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/07/26/7-things-filing-patents-japan/id=71227/


1.  Japan is a first-to-file system;

2.  Unless your offices are in Japan, you must hire a foreign patent agent;

3.  Translating into—and from—Japanese is difficult;

4.  You must submit a Request for Examination within three years—no exceptions;

5.  Japan has unique prior art requirements;
  6.  Japan’s grant rate has declined—but it’s still high;

7.  Japan reintroduced its Post-Grant Opposition System in 2015

VPATAPP alerts_India Patent Law Controversies: Resolution within Policy Framework

http://www.legallyindia.com/blogs/india-patent-law-controversies-resolution-within-policy-framework

Summary:

Unquestionably patent law is one area no nation part of global and knowledge economy (such as India) can ignore. Both granting of too strong property rights or non-recognition of legitimate IP rights for innovations will undoubtedly be harmful to societies globally in the long run. The key is clearly to understand the underlying principles, impact of choice of laws/rules, and design the laws to balance the need to incentivize innovations and yet ensure access of the fruits of innovation soon to all.

VPATAPP Alerts_The Impotence of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Gene Quinn writes on IP Watchdog about the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board. 

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/07/17/impotence-patent-trial-and-appeal-board/id=70952/

VPATAPP Alerts_Rising Tide of State-Enacted Patent Reform

Bill S. 178, titled “An Act Protecting Massachusetts Businesses from Abusive Patent Infringement Claims,” is currently pending at the Massachusetts State Senate.  

http://www.newenglandipblog.com/2016/07/rising-tide-of-state-enacted-patent-reform/

VPATAPP Alerts_USPTO announces post-prosecution pilot programme

The Post-Prosecution Pilot (P3) Program, which is one of the evolving  programs of the Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative (EPQI), was developed to test its impact on enhancing patent practice during the period subsequent to final rejection and prior to the  filing of a notice of appeal.  Effective features of two programs currently aimed at improving this area of prosecution, (1) the After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) 2.0 program and (2) the Pre-Appeal Brief Conference Pilot program, have been incorporated into a single program that adds new, requested features, such as providing applicants an opportunity to present arguments to a panel at a conference.

 

 

http://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/post-prosecution-pilot

VPATAPP Alerts_Thomson Reuters to sell IP & science unit for $3.55 billion

Thomson Reuters to sell IP & science unit for $3.55 billion

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-thomsonreuters-ipbusiness-onex-corp-idUSKCN0ZR13T

VPATAPP alerts_Launch of World Intellectual Property Indicators – 2015 Edition

WIPO's World Intellectual Property Indicators 2015 provides a wide range of indicators covering the following areas of intellectual property: patents, utility models, trademarks, industrial designs, microorganisms and plant variety protection.

http://www.wipo.int/ipstats/en/wipi/

Congrats VPATAPP team for 1000+ downloads on Android

VPATAPP has been downloaded more than 1000 times on the android play store. Congratulations to the team for the first milestone. Wishing a lot of success in the near future.

VPATAPP Alerts_Decision-Making in the Unified Patent Court: Ensuring a Balanced Approach

Decision-Making in the Unified Patent Court: Ensuring a Balanced Approach:

Abstract:

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) will become a central player in the future development of European patent law. For this reason it becomes important to ensure that UPC‘s decision-making reflects the double-function of the Court as an adjudicator of individual disputes and a policy maker. Because of its institutional design, the UPC will be biased towards technology based values. Therefore, there is a risk that non-technical values and interests will be either overlooked or underdeveloped in UPC decision-making which is likely to jeopardize public trust and legitimacy of its decisions. This paper analyses how these blind spots can be covered in patent litigation before the UPC within the current legislative framework. The paper focuses on the role of UPC judges as case-managers and decision-makers, on the potential role of third party interveners, and addresses the key role of the parties in establishing the basis for UPC decisions.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2799132