jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (04/26/89)
There's been so much talk about what copyright and patent
law *should be*, I'd like to know what it currently *is*.
For instance, if Person A invents something on 1-1-90,
and Person B finds out about it and patents it on
1-15-90, while Person A doesn't get it patented until
2-1-90 -- with all dates being documentable -- which
does the law go with? The first to invent, or the
first to patent? And is the law going to change any
time soon?
Please reply by posting and email both. Any sources/
documentation would also be appreciated.
Para un Tejas Libre,
Jeff Daiell
--
"The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those
who, in times of moral crisis, preserved their neutrality."
-- Dantejack@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) (04/28/89)
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) wrote: > There's been so much talk about what copyright and patent law *should be*, > I'd like to know what it currently *is*. [Does the law support] the first to > invent, or the first to patent? And is the law going to change any time soon? This comes from New Scientist's articles about patent law over the last couple of years: most of the world uses "first to file". The US uses "first to invent"; in practice this difference mainly benefits patent lawyers rather than inventors. There is a glaring piece of chauvinism in the US law, in that laboratory notebooks predating the application are only admissible as evidence if they originate from the USA. -- Jack Campin * Computing Science Department, Glasgow University, 17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8QQ, SCOTLAND. 041 339 8855 x6045 wk 041 556 1878 ho INTERNET: jack%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk USENET: jack@glasgow.uucp JANET: jack@uk.ac.glasgow.cs PLINGnet: ...mcvax!ukc!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!jack
jboggs@inco.UUCP (John Boggs) (05/02/89)
Martin, Got your posting in Washington, DC. Came through loud and clear. -- John Boggs McDonnell Douglas Electronic Systems Company McLean, Virginia, USA