Design around

Last updated
Nintendo-Famicom-Controller-I-FL.jpg
Nintendo Famicom controller, with D-pad on left side
Nintendo has a patent on a cross-shaped D-pad, forcing competitors to use circular shaped switches. [1]

In the field of patents, the phrase "to design around" means to design or invent an alternative to a patented invention that does not infringe the patent's claims. The phrase can also refer to the alternative itself.

Design-arounds are considered to be one of the benefits of patent law. By providing monopoly rights to inventors in exchange for disclosing how to make and use their inventions, others are given both the information and incentive to invent competitive alternatives that design around the original patent. [2] In the field of vaccines, for example, design-arounds are considered fairly easy. It is often possible to use the original patent as a guide for developing an alternative that does not infringe the original patent. [3]

Design-arounds can be a defense against patent trolls. The amount of license fee that a patent troll can demand is limited by the alternative of the cost of designing around the troll's patent(s). [4]

In order to defend against design-arounds, inventors often develop a large portfolio of interlocking patents, sometimes called a patent thicket. Thus a competitor will have to avoid many patents when designing. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patent</span> Type of legal protection for an invention

A patent is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the legal right to exclude others from making, using, or selling an invention for a limited period of time in exchange for publishing an enabling disclosure of the invention. In most countries, patent rights fall under private law and the patent holder must sue someone infringing the patent in order to enforce their rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Invention</span> Novel device, material or technical process

An invention is a unique or novel device, method, composition, idea or process. An invention may be an improvement upon a machine, product, or process for increasing efficiency or lowering cost. It may also be an entirely new concept. If an idea is unique enough either as a stand-alone invention or as a significant improvement over the work of others, it can be patented. A patent, if granted, gives the inventor a proprietary interest in the patent over a specific period of time, which can be licensed for financial gain.

Jerome "Jerry" Hal Lemelson was an American engineer, inventor, and patent holder. Several of his inventions and works in the fields in which he patented have made possible, either wholly or in part, innovations like automated warehouses, industrial robots, cordless telephones, fax machines, videocassette recorders, camcorders, and the magnetic tape drive used in Sony's Walkman tape players. Lemelson's 605 patents made him one of the most prolific inventors in American history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patent infringement</span> Breach of the rights conferred by a patent

Patent infringement is the commission of a prohibited act with respect to a patented invention without permission from the patent holder. Permission may typically be granted in the form of a license. The definition of patent infringement may vary by jurisdiction, but it typically includes using or selling the patented invention. In many countries, a use is required to be commercial to constitute patent infringement.

In a patent or patent application, the claims define in technical terms the extent, i.e. the scope, of the protection conferred by a patent, or the protection sought in a patent application. In other words, the purpose of the claims is to define which subject-matter is protected by the patent. This is termed as the "notice function" of a patent claim—to warn others of what they must not do if they are to avoid infringement liability. The claims are of paramount importance in both prosecution and litigation.

Novelty is one of the patentability requirement for a patent claim, whose purpose is to prevent issuing patents on known things, i.e. to prevent public knowledge from being taken away from the public domain.

The software patent debate is the argument about the extent to which, as a matter of public policy, it should be possible to patent software and computer-implemented inventions. Policy debate on software patents has been active for years. The opponents to software patents have gained more visibility with fewer resources through the years than their pro-patent opponents. Arguments and critiques have been focused mostly on the economic consequences of software patents.

To reinvent the wheel is to attempt to duplicate—most likely with inferior results—a basic method that has already previously been created or optimized by others.

Intellectual Ventures is an American private equity company that centers on the development and licensing of intellectual property. Intellectual Ventures is one of the top-five owners of U.S. patents, as of 2011. Its business model focuses on buying patents and aggregating those patents into a large patent portfolio and licensing these patents to third parties. The company has been described as the country's largest and most notorious patent trolling company, the ultimate patent troll, and the most hated company in tech.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patent pending</span> As yet ungranted patent application

"Patent pending" or "patent applied for" are legal designations or expressions that can be used in relation to a product or process once a patent application for the product or process has been filed, but prior to the patent being issued or the application abandoned. The marking serves to notify the public, business, or potential infringers who would copy the invention that they may be liable for damages, seizure, and injunction once a patent is issued.

First to file and first to invent are legal concepts that define who has the right to the grant of a patent for an invention. Since 16 March 2013, after the USA abandoned its "first to invent/document" system, all countries have operated under the "first-to-file" patent priority requirement.

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 arguing before, and sometimes 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.

The Patent Reform Act of 2005 was United States patent legislation proposed in the 109th United States Congress. Texas Republican Congressman Lamar S. Smith introduced the Act on 8 June 2005. Smith called the Act "the most comprehensive change to U.S. patent law since Congress passed the 1952 Patent Act." The Act proposed many of the recommendations made by a 2003 report by the Federal Trade Commission and a 2004 report by the National Academy of Sciences.

The United States is considered to have the most favorable legal regime for inventors and patent owners in the world. Under United States law, a patent is a right granted to the inventor of a (1) process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, (2) that is new, useful, and non-obvious. A patent is the right to exclude others, for a limited time from profiting of a patented technology without the consent of the patent-holder. Specifically, it is the right to exclude others from: making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, inducing others to infringe, applying for an FDA approval, and/or offering a product specially adapted for practice of the patent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patent troll</span> Pejorative term related to intellectual property

In international law and business, patent trolling or patent hoarding is a categorical or pejorative term applied to a person or company that attempts to enforce patent rights against accused infringers far beyond the patent's actual value or contribution to the prior art, often through hardball legal tactics Patent trolls often do not manufacture products or supply services based upon the patents in question. However, some entities, which do not practice their asserted patent, may not be considered "patent trolls", when they license their patented technologies on reasonable terms in advance.

Patents are legal instruments intended to encourage innovation by providing a limited monopoly to the inventor in return for the disclosure of the invention. The underlying assumption is that innovation is encouraged because an inventor can secure exclusive rights and, therefore, a higher probability of financial rewards for their product in the marketplace or the opportunity to profit from licensing the rights to others. The publication of the invention is mandatory to get a patent. Keeping the same invention as a trade secret rather than disclosing it in a patent publication, for some inventions, could prove valuable well beyond the limited time of any patent term but at the risk of unpermitted disclosure or congenial invention by a third party.

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

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Leahy–Smith America Invents Act</span>

The Leahy–Smith America Invents Act (AIA) is a United States federal statute that was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama on September 16, 2011. The law represents the most significant legislative change to the U.S. patent system since the Patent Act of 1952 and closely resembles previously proposed legislation in the Senate in its previous session.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of patents</span> Overview of and topical guide to patents

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to patents:

Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502 (1917), is United States Supreme Court decision that is notable as an early example of the patent misuse doctrine. It held that, because a patent grant is limited to the invention described in the claims of the patent, the patent law does not empower the patent owner, by notices attached to the patented article, to extend the scope of the patent monopoly by restricting the use of the patented article to materials necessary for their operation but forming no part of the patented invention, or to place downstream restrictions on the articles making them subject to conditions as to use. The decision overruled The Button-Fastener Case, and Henry v. A.B. Dick Co., which had held such restrictive notices effective and enforceable.

References

  1. Stainer, Hermann (23 December 2017). "Iconic Patents: The D-Pad". www.hermannstainer.com. Retrieved 19 January 2024.
  2. Strandburg, Katherine (2004). "What Does the Public Get?: Experimental Use and the Patent Bargain". Wisconsin Law Review. 2004: 6.
  3. Kremer, Michael (2001). "Creating Markets for New Vaccines –Part II: Design Issues". Innovation Policy and the Economy. Vol. I. Cambridge: MIT Press. p.  93. ISBN   0-262-60041-2.
  4. Golden, John M. (2007). "'Patent Trolls' and Patent Remedies". Texas Law Review . 85: 2111–2161 [p. 2130]. SSRN   991698.
  5. Rubinfeld, Daniel L.; Maness, Robert (2005). "The Strategic Use of Patents: Implications for Antitrust" (PDF). In Leveque, Francois; Shelanski, Howard (eds.). Antitrust, Patents and Copyright: EU and US Perspectives. Northampton: Edward Elgar. pp. 85–102. ISBN   1-84542-603-7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-07-14. Retrieved 2011-07-25.