origiin newsletter march 2012

8/2/2019 Origiin Newsletter March 2012

1/5

Origiin Newsletter March 2012, Volume 2, Issue 11

1

March 2012 Volume 2 Issue 11

IN THIS ISSUE

Paper publication versus filing for a

patent.........1

Latest News...2

Patentalk.3

Interesting patent of the month..4

Origiin IP Solutions-Zee business

.....5

EDITORS

Anita Kalia

Santhoshi Basuthkar

CONTACT US

Origiin IP Solutions LLP

#51, MSHS, 15th Main,

Sector 4, HSR layout

Bangalore

Mobile

+9198456 93459+9198802 13204

Websites

www.origiin.comwww.origiinipa.com

Origiin in panel discussion

ay Zee Business

Date of telecast:20th March 2012: 10.30 PM-11.30 PM24th March 2012: 9.30 PM-10.30 PM

25th March 2012: 9.30 PM-10.30 PM

Paper publication versus filing for a patent

Bindu Sharma ([email protected])

Patent isa form of intellectual property that consists of aset of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state

to an inventor or their assignee for a limited

period of time in exchange for the public

disclosure of an invention. Three of the prime

requirements in order to get a patent are that the

invention should be novel, industrially useful and it

should be non-obvious to a person skilled in the art,

additionally, it should not fall under Sections 3 and 4 that list inventions that

are not-patentable in India.

Since a patent cannot claim something that already exists, nor can it claim

something obvious or non-inventive, patent examination by the examiner

always involves looking for prior art in the form of earlier publications that

show that the invention is not new or is obvious or anticipated. An invention

is considered as new if it is not anticipated by prior publication, prior use or

prior public knowledge. That means that your own disclosure in the form

of publication can destroy novelty of your invention and make your

invention prior art or anticipated and hence may prevent you from getting a patent. Prior art includes everything that has been published,

presented or otherwise disclosed to the public before the date of filing a

patent application in India or elsewhere in the world. A search including

patent as well as a non-patent search performed to know about prior art is

called as prior art search, essential to be performed to assess chances of

getting a patent for an invention.

The Supreme Court in well-known Bishwanath Prasads case observed that

prior public knowledge of the alleged invention would disqualify the grant of

a patent. In another interesting case, the Court of Appeal in England in


2/5


2

Fomento v Mentomore denied patent rights to a designer of an improved design of a ball-point pen, on the

grounds that the inventor himself had published a description of making ball point pens and had made

two pens embodying the invention available to the members of the public before filing for the patent

application.

It is myth that if you file for a patent, you can not publish the results of research in the form of research

article or paper. The fact is that paper publications can be done after a patent application has been filed

and priority date has been obtained. Priority date (also called as effective date of filing) of a patentapplication is defined as the date on which the first application for a patent is filed. Subsequent

applications in foreign countries have to be filed within 12 months of the priority date. The major benefit

obtained from the priority date is that the inventor will have the earliest priority as compared to other

patent applications on similar lines filed after the priority date.

Due care should be taken before publication related to the invention and the date of publication should

not be before date of filing or priority date of the application. Publication prior to filing of a patent can be

a hurdle for determination of novelty of the invention, which is one of the prime requirements of getting a

patent granted.

LATEST NEWS

Apple faces Trademark issues in China

Apple Inc is fighting a legal assault over the sale of its tablet PC, iPad, in China.

iPad has earned revenue of$20.4 billion last year and has become the company's

second-best selling product by revenue, after iPhone. Proview Technologies, a

Taiwan company, that makes television and computer monitor displays had alreadyregistered the Trademark, iPAD for its products in China, therby the sale of Apple's

iPad in China is facing stiff trademark issue.

Apple bought the iPad Trademark for several countries from Proview Technologies, in late 2009. However,

while the agreement included two trademarks in China, it later turned out that these were owned by a

separate affiliate, Proview Shenzhen. Apple sued Proview's Shenzhen-based unit in 2010, claiming

ownership of the iPad trademark in China. On the basis of the December 2009 contract that Apple says, it

gave global rights to the name, including in China. The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court rejected

Apple's claims on November 17.

China is the manufacturing hub of the Apples iPad. Apple has also quadrupled revenue in China last year

after adding stores and expanding online distribution of its products. Notwithstanding this, Proview

Shenzhen has now sent letters to its China-based electronic distributors and retailers to boycott Apples

iPad. It has also requested the China custom officials to pose a ban on the import and export of Apples

iPad. With the recent launch of Apples iPad 3, the war between Apple and Proview gets tougher!

Sun Pharma to shell out $960 million on infringements

Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc is seeking $960 million in damages from Sun PharmaceuticalIndustries for alleged patent infringement in launching a generic version of drug Protonix


3/5


3

in the US. Protonix is used to treat ulceration of the esophagus. The original patent relating to Protonix,

known chemically as pantoprazole sodium, is held by Swiss drug maker Nycomed and was licensed to

Wyeth, which is now owned by Pfizer.

Sun Pharma launched its generic version of Protonix tablets in January 2008 after Teva Pharmaceutical

Industries and its US subsidiary began selling the drug in December 2007. Wyeth and Nycomed, owned by

Japan's Takeda Pharmaceutical Co, filed the lawsuit in the US District Court in

New Jersey against Sun and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries. If the ruling goesagainst them, Sun Pharma would be liable to pay three times the sales achieved

by the company, which would be in the region of Rs 2,100-2,400 crore.

PATENTALK

This section is an initiative by Origiin to introduce innovations from various inventors and valuable expertopinions on protection, exploitation, of Intellectual property by Intellectual Property experts to provideinspiration to the readers and also make our readers aware about the emerging technologies, products and

innovations. This section also aims at bringing out the importance of patent protection and the way suchinnovations are make difference in evolution of scientific progress in the country.

In this issue, we are introducing three inventors from a small town in Kolar district in Karnataka. They havedeveloped two inventions related to 360 degree surround sound technology of their own kinds in the world.

Inventors: Shakeel HNB, Venkata CKN, Shrinivaas N

(from left to right in photo)

Inventions: 3D Digital Stereo Surround (DSSR) 360

degree sound technology and Total Angle 360 degree

system of Loud Speaker Cabinet Enclosure Design

Technology

Domain:Audio system

Patent status: Pending

Company name:Audio Pro X Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Kolar, Karnataka, INDIA

Here is an excerpt of their interview by Origiin

Origiin: Please tell us something about your Invention.

Inventors: Our first invention is a 3D digital stereo surround sound system that produces a 5.1 channel 3D

Digital Stereo Surround Sound using only one 2.1 channel powered amplifier without consumption of extra

power. The system creates 360 degree digital stereo surround sound output and produces natural,

immersive and spacious effects. Any type of original sound track can be converted into a 360 degree digital

stereo surround sound natural 360. Apart from that soundtrack which is converted using our technology

produces distorted audio sound if shot using a video camera that prevents piracy to a great extent.

Our second invention is a loudspeaker cabinet enclosures design that creates remarkably high quality

sound effects and provide 360 listening coverage without changing the position of loudspeaker cabinet


4/5


4

enclosure. The system of technology is user friendly as the cabinet design can be easily used with many

existing audio/music applications without any modifications.

Both of our inventions have great scope in film industry, Audio/Video Companies and Entertainment

Media.

Origiin: When did you conceive the idea andwhat has been your source of inspiration?

Inventors: Great Scientists like Albert Einstein & Thomas Alva Edison have been our main source of

inspiration. The idea was conceived nearly 12 years back and we started working on it nearly 7 years back

when we started off with a mission of bringing out new sound technology to the world.With Gods grace,

we have been successful in realizing our dreams.

Origiin: What difference did filing a patent made in securing the Idea/Invention?

Inventors: By filing for a patentwe could get much required protection for our innovations which helpedus immensely since the disclosure of invention to the investors became easier that gave us a newdimension of recognition & commercialization of our technologies. Our case-study was done by Zee

business recently and would be telecasted by this month. That gave us confidence, publicity andrecognition in the industry.

Origiin: What has been your driving force that kept your Spirits High?

Inventors: God has been kind to us and our great teamwork and support from family has been drivingforce all these years.

Origiin: How are you planning to commercialise the Invention?

Inventors:We are planning to commercialize the inventions in a big way from small households to film

industry. We could finalize deals with one entertainment house and have couple of projects in pipeline.

Origiin: What are the challenges you are facing especially for Commercialization of the Invention?

Inventors: Lots of questionnaire, explanations, comparison of technology with existing technologies, andfunding have been the biggest challenges we faced so far.

To post your story, write to [email protected]

INTERESTING PATENT OF THE MONTH

Santa Claus Detector

Patent number: 5523741

Inventor: Thomas Cane

Filing date: Aug 19, 1994

Issue date: Jun 4, 1996

Abstract: A children's Christmas Stocking device useful for visually signalling the arrival of Santa Claus by illuminating anexternally visible light source having a power source located within

said device.
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins106192.htmlhttp://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins106192.html


5/5

origiin newsletter march 2012

Documents