Enter the Tiger!
Posted on Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Read more...
Posted on Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Posted in:
Other
|
0
comments
|
|
Posted on Wednesday, February 3, 2010
by Charl Goussard, NAIP Legal Research
Posted in:
Administration,
Lawyers,
News
|
2
comments
|
|
Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Alison Brimelow
Benoit Batistelli
Jesper Kongstad
Roland Grossenbacher
Posted in:
Administration,
Lawyers
|
1 comments
|
|
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009
Posted in:
|
0
comments
|
|
Posted on Tuesday, December 1, 2009


Posted in:
Administration,
Engineers,
Inventors,
Lawyers
|
0
comments
|
|
Posted on Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Posted in:
Administration,
Inventors,
Lawyers
|
0
comments
|
|
Posted on Thursday, October 1, 2009

1) UK IPO Opinion:Since 2005 the UK IPO has been offering opinions in an attempt to resolve patent disputes. The opinion consists of a balanced and impartial assessment of the essential issue of an anticipated or real dispute.
2) Cost?The Cost for an opinion – payable to the UK IPO is £200 (roughly NT$ 10 000).
3) Timing?From the date of submitting your request for an opinion until receiving the opinion takes no more than 3 months.
4) Target Customers1. If you are a patent owner or an exclusive licensee facing a patent dispute, you'd like to have some opinion on the validity of infringement status of your or even your opponent's patent. In some cases the opinion provided by the UK IPO might help to resolve the dispute, saving a lot of time, money and discomfort. On the other hand, if the dispute eventually ends up in court, you would have had time to consider your options based on reliable opinions.
5) Important Things to Know1. Since the launch of this service, the IPO has provided 100 opinions!
6) Who are the trend setters?During the past four years, companies big and small have made use of the UK IPO's opinion service, but some of the "big" names include Marks & Spencer PLC and Unilever PLC. It goes without saying that these are professional opinions, provided by knowledgeable UK IPO practitioners who are as (and if not more) capable as most very expensive patent attorneys.
Posted in:
Administration,
Lawyers
|
0
comments
|
|
Posted on Monday, August 31, 2009
By Charl Goussard, NAIP Legal ResearchTo promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" (Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 United States Constitution).Unfortunately, neither patents nor copyrights were deemed suitable, and in 1984 the United States passed the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act. Although codified under the same title as Copyrights, the Act is clearly intended to provide IC Designs with sui generis ("of its own kind") rights. It has some aspects of copyright law, some aspects of patent law, and in some ways it is completely different from either.
In the semiconductor industry, innovation is indispensable; research breakthroughs are essential to the life and health of the industry. But research and innovation in the design of semiconductor chips are threatened by the inadequacies of existing legal protection against piracy and unauthorized copying. This problem, which is so critical to this essential sector of the American economy, is addressed by the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984. ...[The bill] would prohibit "chip piracy"--the unauthorized copying and distribution of semiconductor chip products copied from the original creators of such works.According to the Act, IC Design rights exist when they are created, just like Copyrights, but unlike patents (which can only confer rights after application, examination and issuance). However, the exclusive rights afforded to the owners of IC Designs are more restricted than those afforded to both copyright and patent holders. Modification (derivative works), for example, is not an exclusive right for owners of IC Designs. Furthermore, the exclusive right granted to a patentee to "use" an invention, cannot be used to exclude an independently produced identical IC Design. In addition, reproduction for reverse engineering of an IC Design is specifically permitted by most laws.
a series of related images, however fixed or encoded, having or representing the predetermined, three-dimensional pattern of metallic, insulating, or semiconductor material present or removed from the layers of a semiconductor chip product, and in which the relation of the images to one another is such that each image has the pattern of the surface of one form of the semiconductor chip product.The top IC markets all have passed their own Acts or Regulations that include variations of this definition. Below is a comparison of the IC Design Protection extended by the major IP offices in the world, as well as that afforded by the Taiwan IP office (TIPO).
Posted in:
Administration,
Engineers,
Inventors,
Lawyers
|
13
comments
|
|
Copyright 2008 North America Intellectual Property Corporation | All Rights Reserved.