7th April , 2010

First climate technology data bank set up at European Patent Office

The European Patent Office has set up the world's first collection covering all the existing patents on climate protection technology. The collection which is to be made public in Brussels in June this year, includes nearly 60 million patents and this climate-relevant technology would be made available to everyone on the net.

30 scientists at the Munich-based European Patent Office and two other groups - the UN Environment Program UNEP and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) - were involved in the research project.

For the first time people including, decision-makers in corporations and in the politics circle can have access to all the patented knowledge and thereby will be able to develop new solutions relating to climate protection.

US Court invalidates cancer gene patents

A district court judge in the United States has ruled that patents should not have been awarded over the breast and ovarian cancer genes BRCA1 and 2. This is the first time a court has found patents on genes unlawful and questions the validity of about 2,000 human genes patents.

Myriad Genetics, the owner of the cancer gene patents claims the exclusive right to test the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which would show whether a woman is more susceptible to developing breast and ovarian cancer. Myriad Genetics charges women in the US around $3,700 for the test. These activities prompted this case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

A Judge in the district court in New York found that certain aspects of the seven patents awarded over the human genes are invalid. The Judge mentions that removing the gene from its natural environment, i.e., the body, is not different from what is found in nature, and therefore such processes are a "discovery" and not an "invention", and would make any patent invalid.

This decision raises concern about whether patents should be awarded on human and other genes and proteins found in nature.

Sir Don Bradman's son wins Legal Fight over use of Sir Don's Name

The legendary Australian cricketer Sir Donald Bradman's son has won the right to sue a law firm Allens Arthur Robinson, alleging exploitation of the cricketer's name. John Bradman and two other executors of Sir Donald's estate had sued the law firm, alleging negligence in the assignment of the cricketer's name to the Bradman Foundation.

They are seeking unspecified damages, claiming the law firm had breached its contract in assigning Sir Donald's name to the Bradman Foundation. The foundation had earlier in 2005, licensed an Australian food company to market 'Bradman' chocolate chip cookies in India. The Bradman family had showed displeasure but an uncertain mediation followed at the end of 2006.

Allens legally advises the foundation, which licenses the Bradman name to corporates to support the Bradman Museum and Bradman Trust.

In March last year a Supreme Court Justice had ruled that the law firm had not breached its retainer and that the family had taken a long time to complain on certain points of its claim. Mr. Bradman and the other executors were granted leave to appeal the Justice’s ruling. The Full Court of the Supreme Court allowed the appeal in a majority ruling, which means the matter can proceed to trial.

In 1994, Allens had prepared a statutory declaration for Sir Donald under which the Bradman Foundation replaced the cricketing great as the 'registered proprietor' of his name and signature.

Medicines Co. takes patent office to federal court

The Medicines Co., a drugmaker has filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against several government organizations including the Patent and Trademark Office, the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, over the denial of an extension for the principal U.S. patent covering the anti-clotting drug Angiomax.

The same court had set aside a prior denial of the company's application and sent the case back to the patent office for reconsideration and the office had issued a new denial. The Medicines Co. wants the court to set aside the office's latest decision and order it to extend the patent.

The patent for this drug expires in May, but the company has exclusivity on the drug until November, which means that other manufacturers cannot sell generic versions of the drug as the company has conducted clinical trials for a probable pediatric use.

Angiomax is used for patients undergoing coronary angioplasty.

Acacia Subsidiary obtains Rights to Patents for Business Process Modeling (BPM) Technology

A subsidiary of Acacia Research Corporation has acquired rights to patents for business process modeling (BPM) technology.

The patented technology in general relates to systems which define and execute business processes.

Acacia Research’s subsidiaries partner with inventors and patent owners, license the patents to corporate users, and share the revenue. Acacia Research’s subsidiaries control over 140 patent portfolios, covering technologies used in a wide variety of industries.

Apple buys iPad trademark from Fujitsu

Apple has acquired the trademark on its name a week before launching ipad. A document from the US Patent and Trademark Office shows that the trademark on 'IPAD' has been transferred to Apple from Fujitsu Frontech North America.

The iPad, which went on sale in the US on April 3, was first announced at a large event in San Francisco on January 27, much before the company even owned the product's name.

The Richardson, Texas-based Fujitsu Frontech North America is a subsidiary of the Japanese corporation that makes point-of-sale and self-checkout systems for retail stores. In its application for the trademark, it said the first use of the name was for a "hand-held computing device for wireless networking in a retail environment", in January 2002.

Fujitsu also had to acquire the iPad trademark from another company, Mag-Tek. The Fujitsu iPad costs about $2,000, significantly more than the Apple iPad's starting price of $499 and had a 3.5-inch colour touch screen.

Rio Tinto staff jailed on bribery, trade secrets charges

A Chinese court has convicted four employees of Rio Tinto, the mining giant including an Australian national on bribery and stealing trade secrets charges, handing down jail terms ranging from seven to 14 years.

These four were convicted of accepting bribes totaling around 13 million US dollars and stealing trade secrets. The Australian national Hu, who is the head of the Anglo-Australian miner's Shanghai office, was sentenced to 10 years in prison. His Chinese colleagues Wang Yong, Ge Minqiang and Liu Caikui were given jail terms of 14, eight and seven years, respectively.

The four had pleaded guilty to taking bribes  and one had even admitted to commercial espionage. Hu had apologized to the court and to Rio, saying he took more than 900,000 US dollars to help childhood friends in need. The four Rio employees were arrested last July during contentious iron-ore contract talks between top mining companies and the steel industry in China, the world's largest consumer of the raw material.

Apple sued over multitouch patent

Apple is accused of violating a multitouch patent with several products, including the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad by a Taiwanese chipmaker Elan Microelectronics, which filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission. Elan Microelectronics indicts Apple of violating an Elan-owned patent that covers "touch-sensitive input devices with the ability to detect the simultaneous presence of two or more fingers."

Elan claims the iPhone, iPod Touch, MacBook, and Magic Mouse including the iPad are in violation of its patent, No. 5,825,352, and has asked the ITC to ban the import of all five devices into the U.S.

The chipmaker had successfully defended this same patent in 2008 and had sued Synaptics in U.S. District Court and several Synaptics touch-sensitive products were found to be in violation of Elan's patent. Later the two companies agreed on a licensing deal.

Novell owns Unix Copyrights

The jury in the District Court of Utah issued a verdict determining the ownership of important Unix copyrights to Novell.

This decision authenticates Novell's ownership of the Unix copyrights, which SCO Group had asserted to own in its attack on Linux. Novell remains committed to promoting and defending Linux, including the intellectual property front.

Novell is a registered trademark of Novell, Inc. in the United States and other countries. And all third-party trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Novell, Inc. delivers the best engineered Linux platform and a portfolio of integrated IT management software, helping customers around the world reduce cost and complexity.