IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin

Last updated

The IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin was a technical publication produced by IBM between 1958 and 1998. The purpose of the Bulletin was to disclose inventions that IBM did not want their competitors to get patents on. The Bulletin was a form of defensive publication. By publishing the details of how to make and use the invention, patent examiners could have a searchable source of prior art that they could cite against subsequent patent applications filed by others on the same or similar inventions.

Contents

The Bulletin has been cited over 48,000 times in various United States patents. [1]

See also

Related Research Articles

In law, an abstract is a brief statement that contains the most important points of a long legal document or of several related legal papers.

United States Patent and Trademark Office Agency in the United States Department of Commerce

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is an agency in the U.S. Department of Commerce that issues patents to inventors and businesses for their inventions, and trademark registration for product and intellectual property identification.

Prior art, in most systems of patent law, is constituted by all information that has been made available to the public in any form before a given date that might be relevant to a patent's claims of originality. If an invention has been described in the prior art or would have been obvious from what has been described in the prior art, a patent on that invention is not valid.

A patent examiner is an employee, usually a civil servant with a scientific or engineering background, working at a patent office. Major employers of patent examiners are the European Patent Office (EPO), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), and other patent offices around the world.

A person having ordinary skill in the art, a person of (ordinary) skill in the art, a person skilled in the art, a skilled addressee or simply a skilled person is a legal fiction found in many patent laws throughout the world. This fictional person is considered to have the normal skills and knowledge in a particular technical field, without being a genius. He or she mainly serves as a reference for determining, or at least evaluating, whether an invention is non-obvious or not, or involves an inventive step or not. If it would have been obvious for this fictional person to come up with the invention while starting from the prior art, then the particular invention is considered not patentable.

Novelty is a requirement for a patent claim to be patentable. An invention is not new and therefore not patentable if it was known to the public before the filing date of the patent application, or before its date of priority if the applicant claims priority of an earlier patent application. The purpose of the novelty requirement is to prevent prior art from being patented again.

Under United States patent law, a continuing patent application is a patent application that follows, and claims priority to, an earlier-filed patent application.

Patent prosecution describes the interaction between applicants and their representatives, and a patent office with regard to a patent, or an application for a patent. Broadly, patent prosecution can be split into pre-grant prosecution, which involves negotiation with a patent office for the grant of a patent, and post-grant prosecution, which involves issues such as post-grant amendment and opposition.

In German and Austrian patent laws, the Gebrauchsmuster (GebrM), also known as German utility model or Austrian utility model, is a patent-like, intellectual property right protecting inventions.

A defensive publication, or defensive disclosure, is an intellectual property strategy used to prevent another party from obtaining a patent on a product, apparatus or method for instance. The strategy consists in disclosing an enabling description and/or drawing of the product, apparatus or method so that it enters the public domain and becomes prior art. Therefore, the defensive publication of perhaps otherwise patentable information may work to defeat the novelty of a subsequent patent application. Unintentional defensive publication by incidental disclosure can render intellectual property as prior art.

Open Invention Network (OIN) is a patent non-aggression community that supports freedom of action in Linux as a key element of open source software. OIN acquires patents and licenses them royalty-free to its community members who, in turn, agree not to assert their own patents against Linux and Linux-related systems and applications.

Japanese patent law is based on the first-to-file principle and is mainly given force by the Patent Act of Japan. Article 2 defines an invention as "the highly advanced creation of technical ideas utilizing the law of nature".

The Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) is published by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for use by patent attorneys and agents and patent examiners. It describes all of the laws and regulations that must be followed in the examination of U.S. patent applications, and articulates their application to an enormous variety of different situations. The MPEP is based on Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which derives its authority from Title 35 of the United States Code, as well as on case law arising under those titles. The first version of the MPEP was published in 1920 by the Patent and Trademark Office Society.

A patent application is a request pending at a patent office for the grant of a patent for an invention described in the patent specification and a set of one or more claims stated in a formal document, including necessary official forms and related correspondence. It is the combination of the document and its processing within the administrative and legal framework of the patent office.

This is a list of legal terms relating to patents. A patent is not a right to practice or use the invention, but a territorial right to exclude others from commercially exploiting the invention, granted to an inventor or his successor in rights in exchange to a public disclosure of the invention.

In former United States patent law, a statutory invention registration (SIR) was a publication of an invention by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The publication was made at the request of the applicant. In order for an applicant to have a patent application published as an SIR, the following conditions had to be met:

  1. The application must disclose the invention in sufficient detail that another person of ordinary skill in the art can make and use the invention without undue experimentation ;
  2. The application complies with the requirements for printing, as set forth in regulations of the Director of the patent office;
  3. The applicant waives the right to receive a patent on the invention within such period as may be prescribed by the Director; and
  4. The applicant pays application, publication, and other processing fees established by the Director.

The involvement of the public in patent examination is used in some forms to help identifying relevant prior art and, more generally, to help assessing whether patent applications and inventions meet the requirements of patent law, such as novelty, inventive step or non-obviousness, and sufficiency of disclosure.

United States Defensive Publication

A United States Defensive Publication is a published patent application for which the inventor has elected not to get patent coverage. Defensive Publications were made between April 1968 and May 8, 1985. The program, called Defensive Publication Program, was replaced by the statutory invention registration program, which itself was discontinued after the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) entered into force in 2013.

Internet as a source of prior art

In the context of patent law, using the Internet as a source of prior art when assessing whether an invention is novel and inventive, may be problematic if it is difficult to ascertain precisely when information on websites became available to the public.

For a patent to be valid in Canada, the invention claimed therein needs to be new and inventive. In patent law, these requirements are known as novelty and non-obviousness. A patent cannot in theory be granted for an invention without meeting these basic requirements or at least, if a patent which does not meet these requirements is granted, it cannot later be maintained. These requirements are borne out of a combination of statute and case law.

References

  1. Delphion Web site, http://www.delphion.com/search-prior_art#tdb,[ dead link ] retrieved on June 20, 2006