The Interaction between Priority and Novelty as Fundamentals for Patent Protection

Dr.Sc. Valentin Pepeljugoski, LL.M. Ana Pepeljugoska

Abstract


The priority and novelty are one of the most important centers of the patent law systems worldwide. In light of these two key points, the methodology of this article envisages the comparison between these two points globally and regionally, focusing on the Republic of Macedonia and Kosovo. This article concentrates firstly in structuring the patent law in the context of the first-to-file system. By doing so the article presents the overall structure of the novelty provisions in the international legal framework as well as in the Republic of Macedonia and Kosovo, by linking its similarities and variances. The accent on the novelty is then brought into correlation with the priority. Furthermore, the difference between the concepts of novelty and priority is explained by illuminating the detailed aspect of certain international and domestic rules. The discussion that follows elaborates on the basic principles and general terms of priority and novelty. In such way the article distinguishes several fundamental issues connected with the present setting of the priority right, among which the most important issue of applying the priority rule also to the states that are not members of the Paris Union. The authors conclude with some observations on continuity and change in the patent system.


Keywords


first-to-file; industrial property; novelty; patentability; patents; priority right;

References


Amgen Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 314 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2003)

Anastasovska D.J, Pepeljugoski V. (2012), “Pravo na intelektualna sopstvenost”, Akademik, Skopje.

Bently L., Sherman B. (2014), “Intellectual Property Law”, Oxford University Press, p. 15.

Berger B. (2006), “It’s Not about the Fox: The Untold History of Pierson v. Post”, 55 Duke L.J. 1089.

Bessen J., Meurer M., (2009), “Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk”, Princeton University Press, Bilski v. Kappos, 130 S. Ct. 3218, 3231 (2010)

Crouch D.(2010), “Is Novelty Obsolete? Chronicling the Irrelevance of the Invention Date in U.S. Patent Law”, Legal Studies Research Paper Series Research Paper No. 2010-08, University of Missouri, School of Law

D`Amato A. (1996), “International Intellectual Property Anthology”, Anderson Publishing Co., Cincinnati

Decision of the Appellate Council of the European Patent Organization T.209/91 (1996)Diamond vs. Chakrabarty

Deepnfar. (n.d).Claiming Priority in Taiwan. Retrieved

from: http://www.deepnfar.com.tw/english/newsletters/nl-2.htm (last access 30/04/2017).

Duke Law’s Scholarship Repository. Retrieved from: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/ (last access 30/04/2017).

European Patent Office. The European Patent Convention. Retrieved from: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/epc.html (last access 30/04/2017).

Federal Trade Commission. Promote innovation proper balance competition and patent law and policy. Retrieved from: https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/promote-innovation-proper-balance-competition-and-patent-law-and-policy/innovationrpt.pdf (last access 30/04/2017).

Federal Trade Commission (2003), “Advisory Commentary on Patent Law Reform, A Report to the Secretary of Commerce 44”

Holbrook T. (2006), “Possession in Patent Law”, 59 SMU L. Rev. 123.

Intellectual Property Office. The TRIPS Agreement Taiwan's Experience. Retrieved from:

https://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=332082&ctNode=6849&mp=2 (last access 30/04/2017).

Japan Patent Office. Retrieved from: http://jpo.go.jp/ (last access 30/04/2017).

Law on industrial property of the Republic of Macedonia (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 47/2002, 42/2003, 9/2004, 39/2006, 79/2007)

Law on industrial property of the Republic of Macedonia (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 21/2009, 24/2011, 12/2014, 41/2014, 152/2015, 53/2016)

Law on industrial property of Slovenia (ZIL-1 dated 6.12.2013)

Law on Patents and Utility Models of Bulgaria (DV no. 18 May 2012)

Law on Patents of Kosovo (04/L-029)

Lexology. Retrieved from: http://www.lexology.com/ (last access 30/04/2017).

Lexology. Lexology. Claiming international priority for a patent application in Taiwan. Retrieved from:

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=aeab6d3d-767c-40f3-ba0c-dde393ab2c53 (last access 30/04/2017).

Markovic M. S. (1997), “Patentno Pravo”, Nomos, Beograd

McJohn M. S. (2003), “Intellectual Property”, Aspen Publishers

Merges R. (2012), “Priority and Novelty Under the AIA”, U.C.Berkley, Revised Version

Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review. Retrieved from: http://mttlr.org/blog/ (last access 30/04/2017).

Patent Act and Acts on amending and supplementing the Patent Act of Croatia (OG Nos. 173/2003, 87/2005, 76/2007, 30/2009, 128/2010, 49/2011 & 76/2013)

Patent Law of Serbia (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, no. 99/11, dated December 27, 2011)

Patentlyo. Retrieved from: http://patentlyo/com/ .(last access 30/04/2017).

Patentlyo. Lexology. First to file and the constitutional argument. Retrieved from: http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2011/06/first-to-file-and-the-constitutional-argument.htmlx (last access 30/04/2017).

Pepeljugoski V. (2011), “Patentno Pravo”, Zdruzenie na pravnicite na Republika MakedonijaPierson v. Post, 3 Cai. 175 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1805).

Polenak A.M, Anastasovska D.J, Buchkovski V., Pepeljugoski V. (2005), “Pravo na industriska sopstevnos - Praktikum”, Drzaven zavod za industriska sopstvenost, Skopje

Seymore S. (2011), “Rethinking Novelty in Patent Law”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 60:919

Sona College of Technology.. Retrieved from: http://sonatech.ac.in/ (last access 30/04/2017).

Takenaka T.(2003), “Rethinking the United States First-To-Invent Principle From A Comparative Law Perspective: A Proposal to Restructure the 102 Novelty and Priority Provision”, 39 Houston Law Review

Trajuris. Retrieved from: http://trajuris.com/html (last access 30/04/2017).

World Intellectual Property Organization. Fields of Intellectual Property Protection. Retrieved from:

http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/about-ip/en/iprm/pdf/ch2.pdf (last access 30/04/2017).

World Intellectual Property Organization. Certain aspects of National/Regional patent laws.Retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/scp/en/national_laws/novelty.pdf (last access 30/04/2017).

World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/patents/en/faq_patents.html (last access 30/04/2017).

World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/prior_art_fulltext.html (last access 30/04/2017).

World Trade Organization. Handbook on accession to the WTO. Retrieved from: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/acc_e/cbt_course_e/c4s2p1_e.htm

World Trade Organization. (last access 30/04/2017). Uruguay round agreement: TRIPS. Retrieved from:

https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_04c_e.htm (last access 30/04/2017).

World Trade Organization, “Handbook on Accession to The WTO: Chapter 4; The accession process — the procedures and how they have been applied”,

World Trade Organization. Retrieved from: http://wtopunjab.gov.pk/ (last access 30/04/2017).


Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.21113/iir.v7i1.284

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2017 Valentin Pepeljugoski, Ana Pepeljugoska

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
x
Message