The New Patent Act.
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Some Notes upon Revolutionary Sections which are now in force.
January ist of the present year was a red letter day in the annals of the Parent Office, inasmuch as the new Patents and Designs Act, 1907, came into active operation. It has been an acknowledged fact, heretofore, that the regulations surrounding an inventor ill this country were not nearly so strict as those abroad, and this comparative laxity also applied to the ascertainment of novelty in the actual subject matter of an invention itself. Letters Patent used to be granted for improvements to existing designs, which would not be for one moment considered by other offices in the International Convention, notably America, Germany, and Austria. Although, on die one hand, the position of the " true " inventor is a much strengthened one under the new r6gime, which is a commercial advantage not to be despised, yet, on the other hand, the fact that there is a possibility of a delay, extending to years, before an inventor can rest assured as to the validity of his patent, owing to the greatly extended " search " 'now made, is a feature of the new Act that will not be looked upon with satisfaction by those who have " ideas." The increased period which may now elapse, from the time of the date of application until the granting of the Letters Patent, is distinctly against the inventor in many ways, and the chief of these is, perhaps, the fact that the inventor will have to wait for some considerable time after laying out capital for experimenting, fees, etc., before he can hope to obtain outside financial aid. This would hardly apply in such force to a patent of some really new departure, as it would to an alternative construction of some already patented device. This short article is not intended to be a digest ef the new Act, but merely a few notes upon some of the more important matters of interest to those of our readers who contemplate applying for a patent, and the followingfive points are the most revolutionary ones to our mind_
. The Comptroller has absolute power to refuse an application for a patent., unless the subject matter is new. This means that not only must there be a difference between the alleged advantages of the invention of the new claimant from those of an existing one, but the new claimant must also show that he has used specific inventive faculty in producing such differences.
Cases under the International Convention may be filed at the Patent Office, from abroad, within twelve months of the date of filing in the original country as before. For example : we will suppose that " A," who resides in Germany, lodged a specification at the German Patent Office on the znd January, 19°8, and that " B," an Englishman, does not lodge a specification at the English Patent Office until the 3rd October next. " B's " apparatus has some slight resemblance to that covered by " A's " application, but he does not know that " A '' exists until " A " comes to lodge his German patent in England on December 31st next, when " B's " application will be affected thereby on the ground of firm grant. As a matter of fact, this regulation does not come into operation until the Board of Trade lays an application before the Houses of ,Parliament, but reference to page 5, section 8, of the Act will give further information_ In the
old rule, " A's " specification did not constitute anticipation, because his patent had not been published in " B's country at the time the latter's application was accepted.
The efficient marking of patented articles, which are on sale, has been made more stringent. Formerly, it was not compulsory to mark a patented article at all, and it was only done by the manufacturer as self-advertisement, and to save infringement ; but, now, this has been completely changed, and every article will have to be marked, not only with the Patent number, but also with the dale that the application of the patent was filed. In the event of two parties' going to law on account of alleged infringement, if the plaintiff's goods are not marked according to !he requirements of law, even if he win his case, he will be unable to recover damages.
Section 27, page 15, is an important one. It states that : " at any time not less than four years after the date of a patent, and not less than one year after the passing .cf this Act, any person may apply to the Comptroller for the revocation of the patent on the ground that the patented article or process is manufactured or carried on exclusively or mainly outside the United Kingdom." The Comptroller has it in his power to revoke the patent forthwith, or " after such reasonable interval as may be specified in the order, unless in the meantime it is shown to his satisfaction that the patented article or process is manufactured or carried on within the United Kingdom to an adequate extent.'' It will be noticed that " interested persons " or some such similar words are not used in this section, but that the Act distinctly states that " any person " may apply for the revocation of an existing patent, and it is within the powers vested in the Comptroller, who has practically the law in his own hands, to do as he thinks fit. It is extremely unlikely that any but an interested person would apply.
Section to, page to, embodies a regulation which is of advantage to the inventor, inasmuch as it allows new and desirable additions to be made to an existing patent without any additional taxes. Such a modification is termed a " patent of addition," and it falls void when the original patent expires. In sub-section 4, of the same section, it reads : " the grant of a patent of addition shall be conclusive evidence that the invention is proper subject matter for a patent of addition, and the validity of the patent shall not be questioned on the ground that the invention ought to have been the su,bject of an independent patent."
The Act also contains a section (No. zo, page to) relati meto the restoration of lapsed patents from any of various causes. This rule is of advantage to inventors, because patents which have lapsed " owing to the failure of the patentee to pay the required fee within the prescribed time can be revived upon an application to the Comptroller. The application must state reasons why the taxes have not been regularly discharged, and it must also show that the failure to pay the taxes was unintentional ; further, it must provethat no " undue delay has occurred in the making of the application." Any such application will be announced to enable opposition to the restoration to be made.