+91-80-26860424 / 34

Call Us Today

LinkedIn

Search
 

Patents

BananaIP Counsels > Patents (Page 16)

Reverse Engineering is Legitimated by Reason: Sega v. Accolade

This image depicts two person trying to put the puzzle together. This image is relevant as it was decided in the case of Sega vs Accolade that Reverse Engineering is limited by Reason. Click on the image for more information

This post was first published on 11th November, 2014.   In one of our recent posts on reverse engineering, we discussed fair use for intermediate copying. Today, we will look into another landmark case that legitimizes copying based on a justifiable reason! In Sega v. Accolade, Accolade used a two-step process to create video games compatible with the Sega Genesis game console. The first step was to reverse engineer the system and create a development manual. Accolade purchased a Genesis video game console and three game cartridges. Then the system was wired up so that the data moving between the cartridge and the console during game...

Continue reading

Patent War: Is the US Arm-twisting India?

This image depicts a man twisting the arm of another person. This image is relevant as the topic itself has the question whether US is arm-twisting India. Click on the image for more information

This post was first published on 4th September, 2014.   India’s domestic Patent Laws have flourished prominently and recent patent rulings have suggested that Indian Patent Laws are consumer friendly. However, recent discussions with the US prompted a need for us to defend our IPR regime. In their view, the underlying Indian Law still tends to favor weaker rather than stronger protection of IP. A number of issues raised in negotiations on TRIPS regime for implementation of Patent Laws in developing countries such as India have been selected to the satisfaction of developed counties such as the US and certain European countries. There are...

Continue reading

Patently Asia – A Drug War!

This image depicts a Samurai Warrior with leaves falling on her. This image is relevant as the founder of Kratom is Natalie. Click on the image for more information

This post was first published on 25th November, 2014.   Japanese Patent about a pain-killing drug extracted from 'Kratom' (Mitragyna Speciosa), a well-known Southeast Asian medicinal plant, is creating contradictions. Patent documents and other publications reviewed, are silent on the origin of Kratom utilized by Chiba and Josai. Patents have been issued in Japan and the US, and patent applications may be pending elsewhere.   How the Plant became a Painkiller drug: In the early 2000s, Japanese researchers began analyzing compounds extracted from Kratom as part of a program to assess medicinal plants. They identified one Kratom compound, 7-hydroxymitragynine, as having particularly potent painkilling effects - considerably stronger and with no side effects, than even morphine,...

Continue reading

Wacky Patents 2 – Ouija Board

This image depicts the name of OUIJA Board. This image is relevant as the post is all about OUIJA board and its use. CLick on the image for more information.

This post was first published on 14th November, 2014.   Next up in the series of Wacky Patents is a board game which has spooked people for ages! This humble board game has been a source of spook for many. Ouija (pronounced wee-jee) is derived from compounded French word, ‘Oui’ and German word, ‘Ja’, both meaning “Yes”. It was originally a trademark owned by Kennedy Novelty Co. which later became generic when people started to use the word for any talking board. What was previously used as a medium for communication with the dead, was later patented with certain improvements. The US Patent Office...

Continue reading

Indian Patent Portfolio of German Car Manufacturers

This post was first published on 16th April, 2012.   Germany is considered to be the birthplace of the automobile since late 1870's when Karl Benz and Nikolaus Otto independently developed four-stroke internal combustion engines. Germany has the largest share of passenger car production in Europe with over 29% market share, followed by France (18%), Spain (13%) and the United Kingdom (9%). Nearly six million vehicles are produced in Germany each year, and approximately 5.5 million are produced overseas by German brands. Germany is placed 4th among automobile manufacturers in the world after US, China and Japan. Some of the leading car manufactures...

Continue reading

Statement of Working to Compulsory Licensing – Are We Missing Something?

This post was first published on 8th April, 2011.   As pointed out by Supriya in her post, a compulsory license may be granted if a patent is not worked in India and reasonable efforts are made to acquire a license. Does the working of a patent in India mean that the patented invention must be manufactured in India? Reading of sections 83 and 84 of the Patents Act take us to that logical conclusion. The sections clearly point out that working of a patented invention in India through only importation would not be enough to avoid a compulsory license.  Form 27...

Continue reading

Patents and Olympics

This post was first published on 25th July, 2012 The 2012 Summer Olympic Games is scheduled to take place in London, United Kingdom, from 27 July. Since the Olympics is around the corner, we would like to share some interesting patents issued pertinent to athlete performance. The patent (US6013007) discusses about a Global Positioning System (GPS) based personal athletic performance monitor for providing an athlete with real-time athletic performance feedback data. A feedback device, worn by the athlete is configured to send the performance parameters to AM, FM, and TV selected bands and can also be heard by the athlete using a...

Continue reading

Non-Obviousness and the Trilogy

This image depicts a Gavel, a hammer which is used by a Judge to get attention. This image is relevant as the articles deals with the famous 'Trilogy' theme in the area of patent. Click on the image for more information

This post was first published on 5th December, 2014.   The Supreme Court's non-obviousness precedent commenced with Graham v. John Deere Co., and its companion cases, Calmar v. Cook Chemical and United States v. Adams, collectively referred to in patent circles as the Trilogy. This trilogy represents the Supreme Court’s first interpretation of the statutory non-obvious requirement. The principal issue in the trilogy was establishing the level of ingenuity necessary to satisfy the Section 103 non-obvious requirement that had been added to the Patent Act in 1952. The decision in Calmar offered a detailed description of prior art and the differences between the claims at issue and the...

Continue reading

Inventive Step – Technical Advance

This post was published on 18th September, 2013.   In a recent case decided by the IPAB at a circuit sitting bench in Delhi on 5th July 2013, the Appellant (Electronic Navigation Research Institute, Tokyo) claimed that it had invented “A Chaos Theoretical Exponent Value Calculation system” and applied for patent under 3624/DELNP/2005. The Deputy Controller held that the functions of the this system was based on mathematical method for solving mathematical equations, and declined to accept the technical effect theory followed under European Patent law, as he was of the opinion that the Indian patent law does not allow patents for...

Continue reading

The TSM Test and Non-obviousness

This image depicts two dolphins jumping high over the sea with the sunset in the Background. This image is relevant as it deals with TSM test which is the Teaching, Suggestion and Motivation test. Click on the image for more information.

This post was first published on 6th December, 2014.   TSM test is the Teaching, Suggestion and Motivation test. It simply means, when analysing the obviousness of an invention while comparing it with prior art, these are the three questions that have to be asked: Is the prior art quoted instrumental in teaching the reader the method of producing the invention? Does the prior art or any of its contents suggest any method of producing the invention in question? Does the prior art talk about problems related to a particular technology motivating an invention in a particular manner? It must be well understood by now that...

Continue reading
Speak with an IP Expert Today
close slider
css.php