o*e
2 楼
第一，申请不下来，中国是世界专利合作条约会员国之一。
第二，就算中国专利局让你蒙混过关批了，你的专利也是无效的。美国的专利如果在中国
没有申请保护的话，在中国任何人都可以拿来用，是属於public domain的东西。
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: 看到美国有些产品很不错，很实用，我一朋友打算拿这些产品
: 去申请中国专利，请问会不会有法律方面的问题？
: 谢谢
第二，就算中国专利局让你蒙混过关批了，你的专利也是无效的。美国的专利如果在中国
没有申请保护的话，在中国任何人都可以拿来用，是属於public domain的东西。
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: 看到美国有些产品很不错，很实用，我一朋友打算拿这些产品
: 去申请中国专利，请问会不会有法律方面的问题？
: 谢谢
p*i
3 楼
depends on whether there have been any publications before u file the
application in china.
the use/sale of the product in US alone would not destroy its patentability in
China cause as far as 'usage' is concerned , china still applies the 'domestic
use' standard, similar to US.
i pretty like this idea though chances are low - manuals/specifications of the
product are considered as publications and may have disclosed enough
information to destroy 'ur application.' but u can be a bit smarter to c
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: 看到美国有些产品很不错，很实用，我一朋友打算拿这些产品
: 去申请中国专利，请问会不会有法律方面的问题？
: 谢谢
application in china.
the use/sale of the product in US alone would not destroy its patentability in
China cause as far as 'usage' is concerned , china still applies the 'domestic
use' standard, similar to US.
i pretty like this idea though chances are low - manuals/specifications of the
product are considered as publications and may have disclosed enough
information to destroy 'ur application.' but u can be a bit smarter to c
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: 看到美国有些产品很不错，很实用，我一朋友打算拿这些产品
: 去申请中国专利，请问会不会有法律方面的问题？
: 谢谢
o*e
4 楼
this is exactly the problem. these US products are very likely to be already
patented in the US. if they are, the patents are published too. this means
that the details of these products have been disclosed to the entire world, so
any subsequent application is barred.
also, ~if~ his future Chinese patents ever turn into profits, there will be a
million ways to attack them. so the financial risk is huge, just like you
said.
in
'domestic
the
change
【在 p*********i 的大作中提到】
: depends on whether there have been any publications before u file the
: application in china.
: the use/sale of the product in US alone would not destroy its patentability in
: China cause as far as 'usage' is concerned , china still applies the 'domestic
: use' standard, similar to US.
: i pretty like this idea though chances are low - manuals/specifications of the
: product are considered as publications and may have disclosed enough
: information to destroy 'ur application.' but u can be a bit smarter to c
p*i
5 楼
already
he/she didn't say that. so can't take it for granted. lots of
products/technologies are not patented actually.
depends. the application may not be published yet, especially if the US guy
files his application in US after the product has been released. so he/she can
still file an application in china if he/she moves fast. and if the US boss
does not go to china for a patent, either of them can enjoy his/her patent in
different jurisdiction.
so
a
don't understand what the financial risk i
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
:
: this is exactly the problem. these US products are very likely to be already
: patented in the US. if they are, the patents are published too. this means
: that the details of these products have been disclosed to the entire world, so
: any subsequent application is barred.
: also, ~if~ his future Chinese patents ever turn into profits, there will be a
: million ways to attack them. so the financial risk is huge, just like you
: said.
: in
: 'domestic
o*e
6 楼
is
I haven't studied Chinese patent law, so I can only make some basic
assumptions. Please educate and correct me if I am wrong.
he/she plans to steal someone else's ideas and patent them in China. he/she
is not the original inventor -- this suggests that there is a great chance
that the Chinese patent could be invalidated if caught in litigation, assuming
that SIPO requires one to be the actual inventor to apply for that patent.
he/she doesn't lose much up to this point, maybe just the filing
I haven't studied Chinese patent law, so I can only make some basic
assumptions. Please educate and correct me if I am wrong.
he/she plans to steal someone else's ideas and patent them in China. he/she
is not the original inventor -- this suggests that there is a great chance
that the Chinese patent could be invalidated if caught in litigation, assuming
that SIPO requires one to be the actual inventor to apply for that patent.
he/she doesn't lose much up to this point, maybe just the filing
p*i
7 楼
discussion, discussion...
assuming
firstly, china adopts first-to-file system. secondly, hard to prove that
he/she stole the invention from the US product. so, no inventorship concern,
either.
in
to
at
same
same
well, seems he/she just wanted to get a paten in china and then collect the
royalties. i don't see any problems unless someone can take away these
royalties.
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
: is
: I haven't studied Chinese patent law, so I can only make some basic
: assumptions. Please educate and correct me if I am wrong.
: he/she plans to steal someone else's ideas and patent them in China. he/she
: is not the original inventor -- this suggests that there is a great chance
: that the Chinese patent could be invalidated if caught in litigation, assuming
: that SIPO requires one to be the actual inventor to apply for that patent.
: he/she doesn't lose much up to this point, maybe just the filing
w*j
8 楼
the product has been patented in US.
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
: is
: I haven't studied Chinese patent law, so I can only make some basic
: assumptions. Please educate and correct me if I am wrong.
: he/she plans to steal someone else's ideas and patent them in China. he/she
: is not the original inventor -- this suggests that there is a great chance
: that the Chinese patent could be invalidated if caught in litigation, assuming
: that SIPO requires one to be the actual inventor to apply for that patent.
: he/she doesn't lose much up to this point, maybe just the filing
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
: is
: I haven't studied Chinese patent law, so I can only make some basic
: assumptions. Please educate and correct me if I am wrong.
: he/she plans to steal someone else's ideas and patent them in China. he/she
: is not the original inventor -- this suggests that there is a great chance
: that the Chinese patent could be invalidated if caught in litigation, assuming
: that SIPO requires one to be the actual inventor to apply for that patent.
: he/she doesn't lose much up to this point, maybe just the filing
w*j
9 楼
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
yes, that guy hs this idea bicoz one of his relatives
patented a NewZealand product in China and used by himself.
【在 p*********i 的大作中提到】
: depends on whether there have been any publications before u file the
: application in china.
: the use/sale of the product in US alone would not destroy its patentability in
: China cause as far as 'usage' is concerned , china still applies the 'domestic
: use' standard, similar to US.
: i pretty like this idea though chances are low - manuals/specifications of the
: product are considered as publications and may have disclosed enough
: information to destroy 'ur application.' but u can be a bit smarter to c
s*i
10 楼
depends a head! you are not the inventor and you can't apply other's
invention as your patent.
【在 p*********i 的大作中提到】
: depends on whether there have been any publications before u file the
: application in china.
: the use/sale of the product in US alone would not destroy its patentability in
: China cause as far as 'usage' is concerned , china still applies the 'domestic
: use' standard, similar to US.
: i pretty like this idea though chances are low - manuals/specifications of the
: product are considered as publications and may have disclosed enough
: information to destroy 'ur application.' but u can be a bit smarter to c
s*i
11 楼
you are not the inventor and you can't apply the patent. period.
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: 看到美国有些产品很不错，很实用，我一朋友打算拿这些产品
: 去申请中国专利，请问会不会有法律方面的问题？
: 谢谢
o*e
12 楼
Interesting. the US system adopts a first-to-invent rule, where if you can
prove that you are the first to invent, even if you have been sitting on the
idea for a long time, you can still claim priority and bar other's
application. This seems to be a more equitable approach, but the transaction
cost is high.
I guess the Chinese first-to-file system saves more legal resources, but it
also creates loop holes as such.
I'd like to see things from an adverse angle -- if I am a manufactuer, and I
wan
prove that you are the first to invent, even if you have been sitting on the
idea for a long time, you can still claim priority and bar other's
application. This seems to be a more equitable approach, but the transaction
cost is high.
I guess the Chinese first-to-file system saves more legal resources, but it
also creates loop holes as such.
I'd like to see things from an adverse angle -- if I am a manufactuer, and I
wan
w*j
13 楼
we only discuss law technique problem.
【在 s**********i 的大作中提到】
:
: you are not the inventor and you can't apply the patent. period.
【在 s**********i 的大作中提到】
:
: you are not the inventor and you can't apply the patent. period.
p*i
14 楼
concern,
hehe. US is the only self-claimed 'first-to-invent' country in the world and
has been considering to switch to the 'first-to-file'system. a tough job cause
they then need to amend the constitution, i guess.
besides, don't forget the last clause of section 102, according to which u may
lose ur right if u 'conceal/suppress' ur invention. so, if u invent sth today
but wait for, say, two years, to file a patent (no publication etc). probably
u will be considered to have concealed/suppresse
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
: Interesting. the US system adopts a first-to-invent rule, where if you can
: prove that you are the first to invent, even if you have been sitting on the
: idea for a long time, you can still claim priority and bar other's
: application. This seems to be a more equitable approach, but the transaction
: cost is high.
: I guess the Chinese first-to-file system saves more legal resources, but it
: also creates loop holes as such.
: I'd like to see things from an adverse angle -- if I am a manufactuer, and I
: wan
p*i
15 楼
period a head. hiahia
how can u prove that the applicant did NOT invent it himself?
【在 s**********i 的大作中提到】
:
: you are not the inventor and you can't apply the patent. period.
how can u prove that the applicant did NOT invent it himself?
【在 s**********i 的大作中提到】
:
: you are not the inventor and you can't apply the patent. period.
p*i
16 楼
then can't lah. u may refer to article 22 of the china patent law
www.sipo.gov.cn
tell all the facts next time. kick. en.
already
means
world, so
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: the product has been patented in US.
www.sipo.gov.cn
tell all the facts next time. kick. en.
already
means
world, so
【在 w******j 的大作中提到】
: the product has been patented in US.
o*e
17 楼
cause
may
today
probably
right, some dillegence is required once there is someone on your back. sounds
like you are very familiar with both China and US IP laws, care to share some
background info?
are you practicing in China now? did you practice in the US before? I can
tell that you have quite a bit hands-on experience.
may
today
probably
right, some dillegence is required once there is someone on your back. sounds
like you are very familiar with both China and US IP laws, care to share some
background info?
are you practicing in China now? did you practice in the US before? I can
tell that you have quite a bit hands-on experience.
l*r
18 楼
Pinkmartini is talking like a civil lawyer---it is all about code.
and
sounds
some
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
: cause
: may
: today
: probably
: right, some dillegence is required once there is someone on your back. sounds
: like you are very familiar with both China and US IP laws, care to share some
: background info?
: are you practicing in China now? did you practice in the US before? I can
: tell that you have quite a bit hands-on experience.
and
sounds
some
【在 o****e 的大作中提到】
: cause
: may
: today
: probably
: right, some dillegence is required once there is someone on your back. sounds
: like you are very familiar with both China and US IP laws, care to share some
: background info?
: are you practicing in China now? did you practice in the US before? I can
: tell that you have quite a bit hands-on experience.
s*i
19 楼
hmm, good question.
【在 p*********i 的大作中提到】
: period a head. hiahia
: how can u prove that the applicant did NOT invent it himself?
【在 p*********i 的大作中提到】
: period a head. hiahia
: how can u prove that the applicant did NOT invent it himself?
l*e
20 楼
Did this company file a PCT?
If this company filed a PCT, and China was a designated country, heh, no way
to copy it le.
【
在 pinkmartini (飘来飘去，就这么飘来飘去) 的大作中提到: 】
can
the
transaction
it
cause
may
today
probably
If this company filed a PCT, and China was a designated country, heh, no way
to copy it le.
【
在 pinkmartini (飘来飘去，就这么飘来飘去) 的大作中提到: 】
can
the
transaction
it
cause
may
today
probably
相关阅读
大家猜这个张贵英该怎么判？申请专利的问题有人要SHARE LSAT online course 吗？我的新专利 (转载)small claims可以要求别人退还支票吗？入关只给了20天停留 (转载)值得投资读这几个法学院么？Emory/UIUC/PSU信用记录发现问题，求助！请问国内结婚美国离婚怎么操作？ (转载)Dol complain会影响我的记录么中国律师在美国工作问题跪求廉价律师资源 (转载)律师没能在五号把材料送到USCIS，可以不可投诉他吗？请各位懂法律的去biology关心一下赵华军的案子。真诚求建议in house counsel到底能挣多少阿？这算Bully还是harassment?law firm interview问题，有包子H1B身份怎么上law school?请问邻居间的民事纠纷找律师的问题