Patents

[Mark CParticipant @markc]

Just tried to find an answer to the following question – if I find a good idea on a machine and then design a version for my own machine, would I infringe the original patent (if it was covered by a patent) by making my own version?

[Mark CParticipant @markc]

[SpringbokParticipant @springbok]

Mark
This has been discussed many times on this forum suggest you do a search for patent

Bob

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

I don't think they would bother with a dood making something for personal use

However, if you're a company or a business and you nick someones idea so you can make more money and profit then that's when legal issues would begin to arise

Courts tend to look at specific questions

"by taking this action was there a financial gain motive behind the offending party" kinda stuff

Damaging someones idea may also be covered

If you make something for yourself and keep it to yourself then fine

 

If you put your build plans on the internet for the whole world to see, for free, then a patent holder would have a case against you

 

It's common sense really

Don't stick a finger in someones eye… and you won't get a punch on the nose

simples !

Edited By Ady1 on 06/04/2013 11:24:48

[Mark CParticipant @markc]

Bob, I would if I could work out how! The search only seems to apply to the titles and it returns nothing at all. The site search also returns a blank?

Mark

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Mark,

1. The search box on the home page is much more effective

2. A Patent discloses the design [which is why some firms don't use them] … anyone is free to build something to that design; but not to commercially exploit it.

Hope that helps

MichaelG.

[David LittlewoodParticipant @davidlittlewood51847]

Mark,

When you ask a question which involves legal issues, it is essential to specify where you live, as the laws may vary.

In the UK, the law on patents is covered by The Patents Act 1977. S 60 (5) provides a list of acts which will not be regarded as infringments of a patent, and item (a) applies to the case you raised:

(5) An act which, apart from this subsection, would constitute an infringement of a patent for an invention shall not do so if –

(a) it is done privately and for purposes which are not commercial;

You should be fine to make a version of a patented device at home for your own use. Note that both things must be true: the act is done privately and for purposes which are not commercial. However, I doubt you would get into trouble for showing it to your friends!

You can find the legislation (including all later amendments) at **LINK** if you are feeling the need to cure your insomnia.

David

David

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

David,

For clarity I think it's the making which need sto be private (i.e. you make it uyouself , not pay someone to do it for you). In the UK there's no problem with telling people what you've done as long as you don't use it to make money, or to produce or provide goods or services which are sold.

Neil

[David LittlewoodParticipant @davidlittlewood51847]

Neil,

Good point; I was guilty of being slightly tongue-in-cheek. It does not seem to be entirely clear exactly what the Act means by "privately". If it simply means "not for profit" then it seems to be redundant as "purposes which are not commercial" covers that. If you paid someone to do it for you, then surely they would be doing it for commercial purposes, and woud thus be infringing. Subsection 5(b) exempts acts done for research and does not include the "privately" bit. Sometimes it can be hard to fathom the subleties of parliamentary draughting, it seems to be designed to create work for lawyers.

David

[mickParticipant @mick65121]

Just don't tell anybody, seems the best idea to me.

[Brian WoodParticipant @brianwood45127]

 

Mark,

1. The search box on the home page is much more effective

2. A Patent discloses the design [which is why some firms don't use them] … anyone is free to build something to that design; but not to commercially exploit it.

Hope that helps

MichaelG.

Mark.

You can protect the design or concept without taking out a patent; a manufacturer would need to infringe that if doing so without permission. The designer or holder of the design copyright can elect to sell or license the design for someone else to make the product that incorporates the design feature.

In doing so, the copyright holder is required to notify the Intellectual Property Office [new name for the Patent Office] so that they are aware of the changed circumstances.

Design registration costs £60 initially for the first 5 years and is renewable for the next 5 years at roughly twice that cost, and thereafter in stages up to a maximum of 25 years.

Patent protection is a good deal more expensive.

Regards Brian

 

Edited By Brian Wood on 06/04/2013 15:46:52

[Chris GunnParticipant @chrisgunn36534]

How will the original patentee find out you have copied his idea?

Chris Gunn

[Gordon WParticipant @gordonw]

Does it still apply that if a very big company pinches a patent, or registered design, the patent holder has to be very rich to do anything about it ?

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

Hi Gordon ,

Yes it costs a fortune to challenge granting or use of a patent but its usually only big international companies like Google and Apple that take things so far . Most patent disputes in UK are resolved by negotiation .

The majority of big UK engineering companies work in a surprisingly ethical way and at least discuss usage of patents with original patent holder .

Situation with non UK engineering companies is very different and many of these routinely ignore UK patents knowing that there is usually nothing the patent holder can do about it without incurring vast expense and waiting years for any result from legal action .

Having a full international patent gives a bit better protection but even these are routinely ignored in some countries .

Regards ,

Michael Williams .

On a point of interest :

More than 90% of all patents granted to home inventors prove in the end to be completely worthless .

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

More than 90% of all patents granted to home inventors prove in the end to be completely worthless .

My hero – Prof. Pat Pending

Neil

[Steamer1915Participant @steamer1915]

Mark,

Earlier this year, I had reason to investigate the copyright issues. I had intended to make a batch of items, as a production engineering exercise, to a design that had been published in a magazine.

I had originally thought that because the design had been published in a magazine, all copyright issues became null and void.

I decided to contact the magazine and ask for advice and through them, was put in contact with the author of the original article. I was open and honest about my situation and explained that I had already started work on the batch and asked for some advice on how we might resolve the issue. It turned out very well for both the author and myself and I am now able to complete the batch with a clear conscience.

I have always believed that honesty is the best policy and the case above would tend to prove this. I can only agree with Gray's comments that it would be better to seek advice from the original copyright/patentee and not from some bloke in the pub.

The worst possible outcome of contacting the copyright holder is that they say no – hardly the end of the world is it? In my case, the outcome was achieved with little fuss and an exchange of e-mails and one phone call. I have never met the man but hopefully will one day. I feel as if I have found a friend and would urge anyone in a similar situation, to do as I have done.

Steve.

Edited By Steamer1915 on 07/04/2013 18:53:07

Edited By Steamer1915 on 07/04/2013 18:59:28

[richard allen 6Participant @richardallen6]

Posted by MICHAEL WILLIAMS on 07/04/2013 11:55:38:

Hi Gordon ,

Yes it costs a fortune to challenge granting or use of a patent but its usually only big international companies like Google and Apple that take things so far . Most patent disputes in UK are resolved by negotiation .

The majority of big UK engineering companies work in a surprisingly ethical way and at least discuss usage of patents with original patent holder .

Situation with non UK engineering companies is very different and many of these routinely ignore UK patents knowing that there is usually nothing the patent holder can do about it without incurring vast expense and waiting years for any result from legal action .

Having a full international patent gives a bit better protection but even these are routinely ignored in some countries .

Regards ,

Michael Williams .

On a point of interest :

More than 90% of all patents granted to home inventors prove in the end to be completely worthless .

There is'nt such a thing as an "International patent" ..you have to apply in each individual country

[richard allen 6Participant @richardallen6]

Posted by MICHAEL WILLIAMS on 07/04/2013 11:55:38:

There is'nt such a thing as an international patent, you have to apply in each individual country….Hi Gordon ,

Yes it costs a fortune to challenge granting or use of a patent but its usually only big international companies like Google and Apple that take things so far . Most patent disputes in UK are resolved by negotiation .

The majority of big UK engineering companies work in a surprisingly ethical way and at least discuss usage of patents with original patent holder .

Situation with non UK engineering companies is very different and many of these routinely ignore UK patents knowing that there is usually nothing the patent holder can do about it without incurring vast expense and waiting years for any result from legal action .

Having a full international patent gives a bit better protection but even these are routinely ignored in some countries .

Regards ,

Michael Williams .

On a point of interest :

More than 90% of all patents granted to home inventors prove in the end to be completely worthless .

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

To avoid this site becoming completely full of copies of my earlier posting :

(1) For ' a full international patent ' – substitute – ' full international patents ' with minor adjustment to rest of original sentence for grammar .

There are several International Conventions relating to patents that effectively mean that you can get International patent protection by making one application in one country and then replicating it in as many countries of the world as you want to – if you have lots of time and money to spare .

Doesn't alter the unfortunate fact that some newly developing industrialised countries and a few notorious old ones routinely ignore any patents originating outside their own borders .

(2) Design registration is a very different thing to Patent registration .

Design registration (and related drawing copyright ) only really gives protection as to what a product looks like . You have protection against someone making literal copies but not much against people taking the basic idea and doing a complete redesign . Also there is no requirement for or much protection of any inventive step in the product design .

Patents give protection as to the essential working principle of the product irrespective of what it looks like . Existance of an inventive step is nescessary and this is essentially the thing that is protected .

Many patents are easy to challenge technically as to the inventive step requirement – sadly many inventions can easily be shown to be obvious , done previously by someone else or just variants on something well known . Patents Office will sometimes cancel a patent after a technical challenge but this is not something that happens very often ..

Challenging patents commercially is a different matter and if a patent holder decides to stand his ground rather than negotiate then huge legal fees can rapidly accumulate .

One of the biggest single topics for patent applications prior to the electronicand bio sciences age was mousetraps – all ever more elaborate and sometimes very amusing but nevertheless they were just mousetraps .

Regards ,

Michael Williams .

[richard allen 6Participant @richardallen6]

Got to agree with your comments as I am going through patent applications myself at the moment. One application that does bug me is the European Patent…..if granted, you then have apply in all Euro members countries…..I had the USA patent granted……that covers the whole of the USA. As stated patents are extremely expensive to obtain…….think twice before you go into anything like this ……..

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

It's interesting to see how quickly, and how far, this thread has departed from the original question posed by Mark C.

MichaelG.

[yogesh machParticipant @yogeshmach68972]

A patent is a set of exclusive right granted by a sovereign state to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time, in exchange for the public disclosure of the invention. An invention is a solution to a specific technological problem, and may be a product or a process. Patents are a form of intellectual property.

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

A patent was originally a state-sanctioned monopoly on manufacture.

The modern system allows the originator of an idea to patent it, even if he hasn't got a clue how to bring it to market.

An example of this is how Savery's rather dodgy water pump gave him rights over Newcomen's atmospheric engine.

Not my argument, it's one advanced by H Stafford Hatfield in the late 30s.

Neil

[AndyfParticipant @andyf]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 10/04/2013 15:06:04:

It's interesting to see how quickly, and how far, this thread has departed from the original question posed by Mark C.

MichaelG.

Indeed!

In the UK, S60 of the Patents Act 1977 deals with infringement of patents, and the answer to the original question is given in subsection 5(a):

(5) An act which, apart from this subsection, would constitute an infringement of a patent for an invention shall not do so if –
(a) it is done privately and for purposes which are not commercial;
(b) it is done for experimental purposes relating to the subject-matter of the invention;
(c) (d) etc [other permissible activities not relevant to this discussion]

Andy

Edit: Sorry; I see this quotation was given by David Littlewood, much earlier in the thread. Interesting to speculate as to whether making replica Dysons in your garage (privately?) and giving one to each of your friends (hardly a commercial purpose) would constitute an infringement. them away spot-on. Would have made a good question in my law exams, had it been invented back then; Sir James is younger than me.  

 

 

Edited By Andyf on 03/05/2013 22:13:13

[Mark CParticipant @markc]

Thanks for the interesting replies, the law is obvious in its statement but I suspect it could get costly arguing the facts (I've noticed that lawyers facts are different to engineering facts!).

Steve (Steamer1915), your experience is interesting – it begs the question about building published project stuff that is based on patented designs? Would that make our magazine complicit by helping the infringement if someone had used a patented design as a basis for their project?

Mark (been busy recently, hence the time gap)

[Author]

Posts