BiiP HQ
Culliganlaan 1B
BE-1831 Diegem (Brussels)

Tel +032 (0)2 403 17 29
Fax +032 (0)2 403 12 12
info@biip.com

NEWS
Created 14 April 2016
hits (95 hits)
comments (0 comments)

8/04/16 - 18u12 Bron: Mashable Het aantal baanbrekende producten dat Apple op de markt heeft gebracht, is ondertussen niet meer te tellen. Maar van een toetsenbordloze MacBook hadden we nog niet gehoord.
Apple heeft een patent genomen op een MacBook waarvan het volledige klavier vervangen wordt door één groot touchpad

.

Apple nam het patent al in september 2015, maar pas dinsdag werd het ook publiek gemaakt. 
In het patent stelt het bedrijf een groot, aanpasbaar en krachtgevoelig touchpad voor. Het oppervlak meet de kracht waarmee je duwt en zou aan de hand daarvan orders uitvoeren. Het grootste voordeel van een dergelijke invoermethode is de aanpasbaarheid. Gebruikers kunnen grote stukken van het oppervlak gebruiken voor bijvoorbeeld een numeriek toetsenbord of een bepaald aantal toetsen. Je kan het oppervlak aanpassen naargelang de opdrachten die de MacBook voor je moet uitvoeren.
Bovendien is een toetsenbord zonder fysieke toetsen veel hygiënischer.

Created 07 April 2016
hits (99 hits)
comments (0 comments)
On February 2, 2016, the Colombian PTO (Superintendence of Industry and Commerce – SIC) published Resolution 3719, which regulates some of the articles of Decision 486, a common IP regime for Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru – regarding the conversion of applications, the filing of patent divisional applications and the patentability examination. Resolution 3719 establishes that a request for: i) the conversion of an application; ii) the division of a patent application into two or more divisional applications, or iii) the merger of two or more patent applications into one, can be filed at any time during the proceedings, until the resolution deciding on a request for reconsideration of a final decision (either granting or rejecting) has been issued by SIC. Therefore, Resolution 3719 clarifies articles 35, 36 and 37 of Decision 486, which state that a request for the conversion, division or merger of patent application respectively can be filed “at any time during the proceedings.” Regarding the “conversion of an application”, Resolution 3719 establishes that said term refers to the conversion of a patent into a utility model application and vice versa, and of a utility model to an industrial design application. When a request for the conversion of a patent application into a utility model application is filed after the deadline to request the examination for a utility model has expired, the utility model examination fees have to be paid when requesting the conversion. The same applies when requesting the conversion of a utility model application into a patent application. With regard to divisional applications, Resolution 3719 states the following: If the applicant does not divide a patent application as suggested by SIC when the application does not comply with the unity requirement, the patentability examination will be only performed on the first inventive group identified by the examiner. A divisional application cannot be the parent application for a further divisional, i.e., a divisional application cannot be further fractioned into one or more divisional applications. When a divisional application is filed voluntarily by the applicant, the division will have to be done “literally”, taking into account the consecutive numbering of the claims. Additionally, the description will have to be in agreement with the division of the claimed subject matter. Resolution 3719 establishes that, if with the response to a patentability examination report, the applicant: i) amends the set of claims; ii) amends the description; iii) or files a new set of claims, the Colombian PTO could, if deemed necessary, issue up to two more examination reports. However, the patentability examination must be finished after 18 months counted from the publication date (9 months for utility models). Additionally, it is established that in any of the cases i-iii described above, the official fees corresponding to the substantive examination must be paid again.
Created 07 March 2016
hits (105 hits)
comments (0 comments)
The number of European patent filings grew again in 2015 reaching a new high of nearly 279 000 (in 2014: 274 000, +1.6%). The figure is an indicator of the growing demand for patent protection from businesses worldwide. The EPO's annual report, published today, also shows that the number of European patent applications rose to 160 000 last year (in 2014: 152 700, +4.8%).
Created 26 February 2016
hits (110 hits)
comments (0 comments)
The Unified Patent Court's approach to interim injunctions will influence businesses' patent strategies in Europe, say experts FOCUS: The ease with which businesses will be able to win interim injunctions to defend against rivals' infringements of their patents will be influential in determining whether companies engage with the new Unified Patent Court (UPC). The UPC will have jurisdiction over a market as big as that in the US and it will have the power to grant interim injunctive relief extending over this whole market.
Created 25 February 2016
hits (114 hits)
comments (0 comments)
On 19 February, the Indian Patent Office amended its guidelines to provide clarity for patent examiners and practitioners on patenting computer-related inventions (CRIs). The amendments parallel similar clarifications and revisions publicised in other countries including the United States and Singapore. The reaction from some quarters has been to assert that software patents are now excluded from patentability. This is incorrect. While the guidelines provide examples of what does not constitute a patentable CRI, the exclusions to patentability, defined under section 3 of the Indian Patents Act 1970, remain unchanged.
Created 22 February 2016
hits (123 hits)
comments (0 comments)
Lack of access to patent advice is a huge problem for start-ups and SMEs in Europe. Last week I was at the European Patent Office in The Hague to make a presentation at the annual two-day, DG1 management meeting. This is a get-together of all directors and managers in the office’s operations directorate-general, the one that is responsible for dealing with examinations and oppositions. For the first time, this year a group of outside speakers was invited to attend. Some gave their views on the performance of the office and how it can be improved; while others, such as me, spoke about a few of the key external trends examiners should know about. My presentation was on the way the patent system can benefit start-ups and SMEs.
Created 22 February 2016
hits (100 hits)
comments (0 comments)
A biotech startup has been issued a patent that involves CRISPR, the breakthrough gene-editing method that has sparked a nearly unprecedented intellectual property feud between some of the country’s biggest institutions. But it’s unclear what effect, if any, the patent will have on that fight.
Created 18 May 2015
hits (283 hits)
comments (0 comments)
  NEW LOGO BIIP winner Adjusted

has been awarded:

Best IP Due Diligence Provider (Belgium)

&

Most Commercially Minded IP Firm (Belgium)

Created 07 May 2015
hits (171 hits)
comments (0 comments)

On 5 May 2015 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the highest court on matters of EU law, handed down two judgments, rejecting challenges brought by Spain to the legality of EU laws that had been enacted to provide for the unitary patent and the Unified Patent Court (UPC). These challenges were the last legal obstacles to the proposed unitary patent regime.

The “unitary patent package” comprises two EU Regulations – one setting out how a patent application granted by the European Patent Office can take effect as a unitary patent across participating EU member states, the other addressing translation issues – and the Unified Patent Court Agreement, a separate treaty between the participating countries which establishes the court that will have jurisdiction to hear disputes concerning unitary patents (and, subject to transitional provisions, existing and future “non-unitary” European patents).

Spain challenged the legality of the two EU Regulations, raising a number of legal objections. Spain’s arguments included claims that the first regulation lacked legal basis under EU law and further infringed the rule of law, as the grant of unitary patents would be entrusted to the European Patent Office, a non-EU body whose decisions could not be subjected to judicial review to ensure the correct and uniform application of EU law. On the regulation dealing with translation issues, Spain’s arguments included a claim that the regulation amounted to discrimination against EU citizens whose language was not French, German or English. Indeed, the precedence given to these three languages over Spanish was at the heart of Spain’s opposition to the new patent regime.

The CJEU found all of Spain’s objections to be unjustified. In brief, the first regulation merely established the conditions under which a European patent granted by the EPO could benefit from unitary effect; it did not incorporate the procedure for granting European patents into EU law. Further, the translation arrangements achieved a legitimate object of ensuring that the translation regime was simple and cost-effective, which would facilitate access to patent protection, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. Entry into force of the UPC and unitary patent regime now depends only on ratification of the UPC Agreement by a further seven member states, which must include the UK and Germany, beyond the six (including France) who have already ratified. It is expected the UPC will be up and running and that the first unitary patents will be granted in 2016 or 2017.

Created 07 May 2015
hits (219 hits)
comments (0 comments)

We invite you to sell us your patents. The Patent Purchase Promotion is an experimental marketplace for patents that’s simple, easy to use, and fast.

Patent owners sell patents for numerous reasons (such as the need to raise money or changes in a company’s business direction). Unfortunately, the usual patent marketplace can sometimes be challenging, especially for smaller participants who sometimes end up working with patent trolls. Then bad things happen, like lawsuits, lots of wasted effort, and generally bad karma. Rarely does this provide any meaningful benefit to the original patent owner.

So today we’re announcing the Patent Purchase Promotion as an experiment to remove friction from the patent market. From May 8, 2015 through May 22, 2015, we’ll open a streamlined portal for patent holders to tell Google about patents they’re willing to sell at a price they set. As soon as the portal closes, we’ll review all the submissions, and let the submitters know whether we’re interested in buying their patents by June 26, 2015. If we contact you about purchasing your patent, we’ll work through some additional diligence with you and look to close a transaction in short order. We anticipate everyone we transact with getting paid by late August.

Created 07 May 2015
hits (175 hits)
comments (0 comments)

On April 7, 2015, the Brazilian PTO (INPI) published in the Official Gazette Resolution 146/2015 establishing an electronic system for the online filing of industrial designs. The new service which offers discounts on service fees, is already up and running since April 22, 2015.

Created 15 April 2015
hits (244 hits)
comments (0 comments)

Under the new opposition system any party will be able to file an opposition within 6 month of patent issuance.
The opposition period starts from the publication date of the granted patent publication (JP B1/B2 publication).

Created 13 March 2015
hits (220 hits)
comments (0 comments)

Source: De Tijd
Wouter Van Driessche, 13 Maart
...In Leuven werken meer dan 10.000 mensen in de gezondheidszorg, en meer dan 12.000 in tal van technologische sectoren. 'En ook als het om patenten gaat in de gezondheidszorg - voor het ontwikkelen van medicijnen, bijvoorbeeld - zitten we in de Europese top.'...

Created 13 March 2015
hits (215 hits)
comments (0 comments)

Source: Lexology
Jennifer Bailey, Marks & Clerk, March 10 2015
Following a lengthy period of uncertainty, the President of the EPO recently submitted a document setting out the proposals for the level of renewal fees for the Unitary Patent to the Select Committee of the Administrative Council.
As many readers will be aware, the Unitary Patent will be enforceable and revocable throughout participating EU member states in a single action. In choosing whether to elect a ‘standard’ European Patent or a Unitary Patent, cost will be a key consideration for many patentees. ...

Created 10 February 2015
hits (221 hits)
comments (0 comments)

Source Spruson&Feguson IP 10 FEBRUARY, 2015

CHINA NEW IP COURT SYSTEM STARTS WITH THE FIRST IP COURT IN BEIJING

Improved intellectual property (IP) enforcement in China took a leap forward last year when the Beijing IP Court opened its doors and accepted its first case. The Beijing IP Court was the initial IP Court of first instance established and IP Courts in Guangzhou and Shanghai became operational shortly thereafter. The introduction of these specialized IP Courts is enabled by the October 2014 pronouncement by the Chinese Supreme Court clarifying the jurisdiction of the IP courts.

Login (oc)