Sender Information:
VSPS.com Inc.
Sent by: Bill Warman
[Private]
11341 E. Adobe Rd
Mesa, AZ, 85207, US

[back to notice text]

Answer: 35 U.S.C. 273 Defense to infringement based on earlier inventor.

(a) DEFINITIONS.- For purposes of this section-

(1) the terms "commercially used" and "commercial use" mean use of a method in the United States, so long as such use is in connection with an internal commercial use or an actual arm's-length sale or other arm's-length commercial transfer of a useful end result, whether or not the subject matter at issue is accessible to or otherwise known to the public, except that the subject matter for which commercial marketing or use is subject to a premarketing regulatory review period during which the safety or efficacy of the subject matter is established, including any period specified in section 156(g), shall be deemed "commercially used" and in "commercial use" during such regulatory review period;

(2) in the case of activities performed by a nonprofit research laboratory, or nonprofit entity such as a university, research center, or hospital, a use for which the public is the intended beneficiary shall be considered to be a use described in paragraph (1), except that the use-

(A) may be asserted as a defense under this section only for continued use by and in the laboratory or nonprofit entity; and

(B) may not be asserted as a defense with respect to any subsequent commercialization or use outside such laboratory or nonprofit entity;

(3) the term "method" means a method of doing or conducting business; and

(4) the "effective filing date" of a patent is the earlier of the actual filing date of the application for the patent or the filing date of any earlier United States, foreign, or international application to which the subject matter at issue is entitled under section 119, 120, or 365 of this title.

(b) DEFENSE TO INFRINGEMENT.-

(1) IN GENERAL.- It shall be a defense to an action for infringement under section 271 of this title with respect to any subject matter that would otherwise infringe one or more claims for a method in the patent being asserted against a person, if such person had, acting in good faith, actually reduced the subject matter to practice at least 1 year before the effective filing date of such patent, and commercially used the subject matter before the effective filing date of such patent.

(2) EXHAUSTION OF RIGHT.- The sale or other disposition of a useful end product produced by a patented method, by a person entitled to assert a defense under this section with respect to that useful end result shall exhaust the patent owner's rights under the patent to the extent such rights would have been exhausted had such sale or other disposition been made by the patent owner.

(3) LIMITATIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS OF DEFENSE.- The defense to infringement under this section is subject to the following:

(A) PATENT.- A person may not assert the defense under this section unless the invention for which the defense is asserted is for a method.

(B) DERIVATION.- A person may not assert the defense under this section if the subject matter on which the defense is based was derived from the patentee or persons in privity with the patentee.

(C) NOT A GENERAL LICENSE.- The defense asserted by a person under this section is not a general license under all claims of the patent at issue, but extends only to the specific subject matter claimed in the patent with respect to which the person can assert a defense under this chapter, except that the defense shall also extend to variations in the quantity or volume of use of the claimed subject matter, and to improvements in the claimed subject matter that do not infringe additional specifically claimed subject matter of the patent.

(4) BURDEN OF PROOF.- A person asserting the defense under this section shall have the burden of establishing the defense by clear and convincing evidence.

(5) ABANDONMENT OF USE.- A person who has abandoned commercial use of subject matter may not rely on activities performed before the date of such abandonment in establishing a defense under this section with respect to actions taken after the date of such abandonment.

(6) PERSONAL DEFENSE.- The defense under this section may be asserted only by the person who performed the acts necessary to establish the defense and, except for any transfer to the patent owner, the right to assert the defense shall not be licensed or assigned or transferred to another person except as an ancillary and subordinate part of a good faith assignment or transfer for other reasons of the entire enterprise or line of business to which the defense relates.

(7) LIMITATION ON SITES.- A defense under this section, when acquired as part of a good faith assignment or transfer of an entire enterprise or line of business to which the defense relates, may only be asserted for uses at sites where the subject matter that would otherwise infringe one or more of the claims is in use before the later of the effective filing date of the patent or the date of the assignment or transfer of such enterprise or line of business.

(8) UNSUCCESSFUL ASSERTION OF DEFENSE.- If the defense under this section is pleaded by a person who is found to infringe the patent and who subsequently fails to demonstrate a reasonable basis for asserting the defense, the court shall find the case exceptional for the purpose of awarding attorney fees under section 285 of this title.

(9) INVALIDITY.- A patent shall not be deemed to be invalid under section 102 or 103 of this title solely because a defense is raised or established under this section.

(Added Nov. 29, 1999, Public Law 106-113, sec. 1000(a)(9), 113 Stat. 1501A-555 (S. 1948 sec. 4302).)

[back to notice text]

Answer: In 1998, Congress passed the On-Line Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) in an effort to protect service providers on the Internet from liability for the activities of its users. Codified as section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), this new law exempts on-line service providers that meet the criteria set forth in the safe harbor provisions from claims of copyright infringement made against them that result from the conduct of their customers. These safe harbor provisions are designed to shelter service providers from the infringing activities of their customers. If a service provider qualifies for the safe harbor exemption, only the individual infringing customer are liable for monetary damages; the service provider's network through which they engaged in the alleged activities is not liable.

[back to notice text]

Answer: There are two basic lines of defense: non-infringement and invalidity.

Non-infringement: To infringe a patent, one must practice every element of a claim. If you do not practice one or more of the elements of a claim, then you do not infringe that claim. This determination often rests on how a court interprets the language of the claims you are accused of infringing.

Invalidity: Only a valid patent can be enforced. Issued patents are presumed valid, but this presumption can be overcome if prior art exists that demonstrates an invention was not novel or that it was obvious at the time the patent application was filed. Especially in the case of software and Internet business method patents, articles disclosing or describing the patented inventions may exist in trade publications that would not have been found by the patent examiner and would not have been part of the prosecution file of an issued patent on file with the USPTO. The patent holder's failure to name all inventors may also invalidate a patent.

[back to notice text]

Answer: A patent is a form of intellectual property. A U.S. patent is a right granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office to an inventor to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing an invention for a limited time. In the U.S., Patent law is driven by the language of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C.

[back to notice text]

Answer: A patent consists of an abstract, a description of the invention, disclosures of prior art, drawings, and one or more claims. The claims are the only truly enforceable part of a utility patent, and they define the property right owned by the patent holder. They are written in technical language, and must embody subject matter that is within the scope of patent law, is novel and is not obvious. The more broadly written the claims, the less likely they are to avoid rejection or invalidation on the grounds of obviousness or anticipation by prior technology. The more narrowly written, the less likely a competing technology or device infringes the claims. To infringe a patent, one must practice every element of a claim. If you do not practice one or more of the elements of a claim, then you do not infringe that claim.

[back to notice text]

Answer: The following subjects are not entitled to patent protection:

[back to notice text]

Answer: A license, in its simplest terms, is a promise by the patent owner (the licensor) not to sue the licensee for exercising one of the patent owner's rights. Patent laws grant the patent owner rights to exclude others from making, using, or selling the patented invention. Using a contract called a "license," a patent owner may choose to allow one or more others to make, use and/or sell the invention, usually in exchange for payment. As long as the licensee abides by the terms of the license contract, a patent owner cannot sue the licensee for infringement. Patent infringement cases are often settled by the accused infringer entering into a license agreement with the patent owner and promising to pay the patent owner royalties.