Comments on: Show Questions http://silkroadintl.net/blog/2008/04/16/show-questions/ Your Branch Office in Asia Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:46:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: david http://silkroadintl.net/blog/2008/04/16/show-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-40 david Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:03:59 +0000 http://silkroadintl.net/blog/?p=254#comment-40 Thanks for the details. My advice in no way should be taken as legal advice, I'm just (very simplistically) repeating advice that I've been given from lawyers here. I'm hoping that people are more safe than sorry when all is said and done. Thanks again! Thanks for the details. My advice in no way should be taken as legal advice, I’m just (very simplistically) repeating advice that I’ve been given from lawyers here. I’m hoping that people are more safe than sorry when all is said and done.

Thanks again!

]]> By: FOARP http://silkroadintl.net/blog/2008/04/16/show-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-39 FOARP Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:52:27 +0000 http://silkroadintl.net/blog/?p=254#comment-39 Do first-to-file systems allowing more scope for people to patent your invention before you do?I doubt it. First-to-invent requires an inventor to prove that they were the first person to exercise due diligence in attempting to reduce the invention to practice. This can be a lot harder (and way more expensive) to prove than the level of proof required in the interference proceedings found in most first-to-file countries, where you simply have to show that the other party stole your invention and that you are therefore entitled to the patent. It would not really make much difference if China were a first-to-invent country, as people would still be able to file applications based on products and material which you had inadvertantly shown them, but getting the patent handed over to you would be much more difficult. Do first-to-file systems allowing more scope for people to patent your invention before you do?I doubt it.

First-to-invent requires an inventor to prove that they were the first person to exercise due diligence in attempting to reduce the invention to practice. This can be a lot harder (and way more expensive) to prove than the level of proof required in the interference proceedings found in most first-to-file countries, where you simply have to show that the other party stole your invention and that you are therefore entitled to the patent. It would not really make much difference if China were a first-to-invent country, as people would still be able to file applications based on products and material which you had inadvertantly shown them, but getting the patent handed over to you would be much more difficult.

]]>