|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 14 2013 @ 02:05 PM EDT |
> In such a situation, it's possible to not be able to work
> around the patent on the invention - not because it's
> overbroad - but simply because no one else has figured out
> how it actually works yet.
In which case it should be invalidated for failure to make proper
disclosure....
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Wol on Friday, March 15 2013 @ 04:26 AM EDT |
Yup. It's not a certainty.
Personally, I'd word it completely differently. In order to be valid, a patent
needs to create a NEW market. Even if it then sews up that market so tightly
nobody else is allowed in, that's still not over-broad.
But inasmuch as it's just one more new solution to an old problem, then yes it
has to be narrow. If someone comes up with a patent in the first category, good
luck to them. They DESERVE their monopoly!!!
(In actual fact, even in the second category, a patent should still be of the
first sort - it should carve out a NEW niche into which competitors are not
allowed except by permission.)
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|