Patent systems around the globe offer a quid pro quo that exchanges limited monopolies for disclosures of inventions. Most patent filings list: (1) the inventor(s); and (2) the applicant. The applicant may be an assignee (e.g., company, university, organization, etc.) with rights to seek patent protection on innovations that were identified during employment and that were within a scope of employment. Frequently, the assignee is a current or former employer of the inventor(s). In some jurisdictions (e.g., in the United States), the inventor(s) hold the rights to prosecute the patent application and assert any resulting patent unless and until the inventor(s) assign those rights to another entity (which is frequently done in employment and work?for?hire contracts). In some jurisdictions (e.g., the European Union), it is presumed that the party that applied for a patent holds the rights to the patent application. Thus, it is well-established that non-human entities may be the applicant, assignee, and/or owner of a patent. However, it is not well-established that a non-human entity may be an inventor on a patent applicant. Multiple patent offices (e.g., USPTO, UKIPO, and WIPO) have been considering what the standard in this respect should be.
Litigation
- How Patent Owners Should Be Rethinking Venue Selection and Case Strategy in a World Without Waco
- Amicus Brief Backing Inventor’s Eligibility Petition to SCOTUS Says 101 Exceptions Constitute ‘Judicial Legislation’
- Miami Beware: Patent Clouds Are Quickly Approaching the Sunshine State
- CAFC Affirms Water Heater Infringement Ruling Based on District Court Claim Construction
- CAFC Upholds PTAB’s Finding that Samsung Failed to Prove Magnetic Stripe Emulator Claims Obvious
Recent Posts
- The Copyright Claims Board: A Venue for Pursuing Actual or Statutory Damages Impacting Both Registered and Unregistered Works
- IP Goes Pop! – Intellectual Property and a ‘Wacky’ Professor – Brands and Inventions in the Springfield Universe, Part II
- How Patent Owners Should Be Rethinking Venue Selection and Case Strategy in a World Without Waco
- Amicus Brief Backing Inventor’s Eligibility Petition to SCOTUS Says 101 Exceptions Constitute ‘Judicial Legislation’
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, August 12: Canada to Add Resale Royalties to Copyright Law, Fifth Circuit Affirms Exclusion of Evidence in ‘Call of Duty’ Copyright Suit, and Ninth Circuit Rejects Trademark Appeal in Yoga Pants Case