Have you ever tried receiving a telephone call, a letter or an email from a lawyer or the company that says “you are infringing his client’s work, thus creating a copyright violation”? The content of the letter or the message from the speaker will say that your work, it could be a written book that has been published or a newspaper review, whatever it is, it has caught the attention from someone who views it has copyright. They will inform you that if you don’t take any steps to fix the issue, then they will file a case and take you to court for it. Naturally, you will be feeling a zap of panic within you, but no need. You have to think this through and try to remember about it. Don’t do anything reckless yet; you need to have your options available before you making your move.
First, let’s understand what copyright infringement is? It is when someone dares try to use the materials that are already claimed by the creator and owner and say it as his. This material could be anything from books to the newspaper to magazines, to article reports or songs, if someone claims this original work when someone already owns it and has it send to the public under a different name, then this person is in violation of copyrighting someone’s work. This happens to a lot of people, but there are some cases when people file a case on that person without collective proof or enough evidence that such claims are valid.
This is where the IP Claim Defense came in. To be sure what they are saying is true, then you have to glean everything to check that you’ve followed the rules and regulations and see if you have violated anything that might have upset them into bringing you to court. If you check, reviewed and gather as much information as you can regarding the material that you use, then you can finally understand what is the source of the issue. Once that you have everything, enough information to determine what they are saying is true then consult an expert or call your lawyer to assist you in helping to resolve the problem. Provide your lawyer, who knows everything about the law and can give expert advice on how to best approach the problem, a license agreement, if you have one in your hand or any other supporting documents that might help the case. There are something that you don’t know about the lawfully without having a headache, so it is preferable to have a hired expert to explain and have you understand to grasp better the situation that you are in.
This way you won’t start to lose it. For the reason why you need the IP claim defense, it is because you require their expert help. And with their help, then can assist your case properly without making the situation even worse.…
Until late 1990’s, business methods were not considered patentable. The gaining prominence of e-commerce, however, brought with it a paradigm shift. New practices, processes, methods and business models that had never been experienced before came into being. In fact, they became the new norm with sophisticated IT related processes replacing the mechanistic models. With this, it continually presented a challenge determining whether a particular computer-implemented invention was a business invention or a technological invention.
Case after case was brought to the court of a company allegedly copying another’s business model. An example of such a case was AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc. This 1999 case where it was decided that AT&T had failed to claim statutory subject matter. Eventually, it was agreed that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) should add business methods patent as similar to any other invention. As a result, business methods are now patentable.
Which business methods are patentable and which are not?
After USPTO allowed patenting of business methods on equal footing with other inventions, there was a widespread registration of patents. Patents issued for business methods increased from a mere 1000 in 1997 to a whopping 11,000 in 2007. A majority of these methods were vague and a duplication by paraphrasing an existing method. A review was needed at this point to specify a business method that was eligible for patenting.
For a business method to be patent-eligible, the business method claim must either be tied to a particular machine or be a method that transforms physical matter such as vulcanizing rubber or smelting ores. The Supreme Court has clarified that the machine or transformation test is not the sole test for patent method eligibility. The test is merely one criterion, though key, not the solely available test to determine patent-eligibility. This has been left open thus far, and any contentious method is subject to advanced scrutiny to determine its legibility.
According to USPTO ‘claims drawn to a method of doing business should not be categorized as a business process’. This is especially the case for a modification of an existent business model. Unless the method is central to a business process, it is not eligible.
Another form of unpatented business idea is abstract ideas. When a business is merely expressing an abstract business idea without the actual implementation plan, it is then not eligible for patenting. A business method should clearly communicate implement ability.
Get more information at techpats.com/.…