But there are also cases where you will get a product that says “patent pending.” Why do some businesses decide to use this mark? Does it protect the product in the same way that a patent number would?
No, a “patent pending” stamp is not legally going to change anything. But it is provided for informational purposes. The company wants anyone who sees the product to know that they have already applied and that their patent is next in line. If someone is going to be approved for that patent, it will be them.
The issue is that the patent process can be complicated and take time. It’s definitely not something that business owners want to do on their own. It can be very complicated. While they work with an experienced legal team to navigate this process, they mark the products as “patent pending” so that they don’t have to worry about their intellectual property. They can begin selling before the patent has fully been approved, hoping that they will eventually get the approval they need to protect those products long–term.
If you’re going through this process, you certainly need to avoid mistakes and explore all of your legal options. Please contact us to learn more about how we can help you at this time.
]]>So what does that mean for the ability to patent something that’s been created with the help of AI? While the federal government is notoriously slow in keeping up with new technology, last year, President Biden gave the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) until the end of this month to provide official guidance on this question.
According to this newly published official guidance, as long as one or more people made a “significant contribution” to the invention, they can be named on a patent as the inventor(s). A federal appeals court has ruled that an AI system can’t be named as an inventor on a patent in a case where one was denied.
Just what “significant contribution” means will likely still be the subject of dispute as people seek patents. The USPTO gave some examples of cases where AI is used and whether humans made a “significant contribution” to the invention.
For example, if someone asked an AI chatbot to design a crucial part of an invention, they likely wouldn’t be able to patent it. The USPTO explains, “A natural person who only presents a problem to an AI system may not be a proper inventor” – at least of that invention.
If, however, “a significant contribution could be shown by the way the person constructs the prompt in view of a specific problem to elicit a particular solution from the AI system,” they might be eligible to patent it.
All of this brings up the question of whether someone has to disclose their use of AI when applying for a patent. Currently, the USPTO has no such requirement.
There’s a concern that this opens the door to “patent trolls” being able to apply for patents they don’t intend to use to create anything but only as grounds for patent lawsuits. One consumer advocacy group official says, “The economy already is harmed by a surplus of low-quality patents which leads to unproductive litigation, rent-seeking and transfers of wealth from productive businesses to those who are experts at navigating the legal system.”
While AI can no doubt be a useful tool for researchers and inventors, it also brings added complexity to the patent process. This is yet another reason why it’s crucial to have experienced legal guidance when seeking a patent.
]]>Most have a vague notion that it protects inventions, but not much more. Further, patent law has changed in a few ways over the years, meaning that what you thought you knew may be old news.
In a huge shift, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) began issuing patents to those who file first, which might not be the inventor. In other words, whoever gets to the patent office first, not necessarily the original creator, may end up with the patent.
While this change rewards swift action, it may disadvantage those who diligently refine their ideas before seeking a patent.
When someone else gets a patent you deserve, it is not necessarily the final curtain call. In 2012, patent law changes made it possible for another party to challenge weak patents in certain situations. When successful, this could clear the field and enable you to patent your genuine innovations.
On the other hand, it could open a pathway for someone to contest a patent you hold, in which legal guidance is strongly recommended.
As you can see, the current patent law landscape presents both possibilities and pitfalls. Patent holders and aspirants should stay informed about the law to ensure stringent preservation now and in times to come.
You understand the value that intellectual property, including patents, can add to your individual and business interests, or you would not be reading this post. Take it a step further by seeking guidance from an experienced attorney who understands the subtle nuances of patent law.
]]>