Re: Patent Details. Please read!
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
|From:||Abizar Lakdawalla <email@example.com>|
|To:||Tim Morken <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
Tim, thanks for one of the best write-ups on patents that I have ever seen!
Tim Morken wrote:
> Histonetters, here is a post from August 1998 concerning patents on tyramide. It details what a patent is all about and how it affects us in the lab. The question I have, is if you use a different method than that outlined in the patent, are you home free?
> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 08:22:55 -0500
> From: LINDA MARGRAF MD <LMARGRAF@childmed.dallas.tx.us> Save Address Block Sender
> Subject: A patent primer
> To: email@example.com
> Dear Histonetters:
> Here's the information from Mark Bobrow regarding patents. This is in follow-up
> to the recent discussions on the tyramide amplification patent. Hope folks find
> this helpful.
> The patent system goes back over five hundred years where, in Britain, one
> could obtain a patent granted by the King. In the U.S., the first patent
> commission was headed by George Washington, who personally signed every patent
> granted during his tenure.
> A patent is a right granted by the government. Article I, Section 8 of the
> United States Constitution states,
> "The Congress shall have the power to promote the progress of science and
> useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the
> exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
> It is often misunderstood that the purpose of the patent system is, as stated
> in the Constitution, *to promote the progress of science and useful arts.*
> The concept is that by disclosing (and not keeping a secret) an invention,
> technological innovation will continue. In the process of obtaining a patent,
> the inventor must disclose the invention and the best mode of practicing it
> (in other words, they can't hold anything back, or the patent will not be
> In return for disclosing the invention, the government grants the patent
> holder the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the
> invention. Currently, these rights extend for 20 years from the filing date.
> After the term expires, everyone is free to make, use or sell the product or
> method which was disclosed in the patent
> The right to exclude others from practicing the invention applies to everyone,
> including academic investigators. In terms of being able to use what is in
> the published literature, U.S. patents are published after they issue, in
> Europe the applications are published 18 months after filing. So, even though
> patented products and methods are in the published literature, using them
> without proper authorization from the patent holder is not legal.
> Now, the reality of the situation is that if an academic researcher infringes
> a patent, the potential damages are so minor, that chances are nothing will
> happen. But, if it is a pathology lab, which is using a patented method to
> report rerults, then this is like selling the invention for profit, and the
> damages could be significant (patent infringement damages are often multiples
> of the actual monetary damages plus legal fees).
> Another case where damages could be significant is an academic investigator
> who publishes a patented method and/or encourages others to infringe. This is
> called contributory infringement. The liability now falls for every case that
> cites the original "illegal" disclosure. This is like finding a way to rob a
> bank, and then teaching others how to do so. So for people who are making
> home made tyramides, when they publish the method, they are potentially liable
> for contributory infringement.
> There have been some questions as to the extent of coverage of the tyramide
> amplification patents. In the spirit of simplification, four basic concepts
> are claimed. They are the enzyme substrates (e.g., tyramides), the product of
> the enzyme-substrate reaction, the method of catalyzed reporter deposition
> (e.g., detecting an analyte with a reporter enzyme using the deposition of a
> reporter), and assays using the method of catalyzed reporter deposition. If
> you wish, you may look it up yourselves. One of the patents is U.S. patent
> 5,731,158, Catalyzed Reporter Deposition. As an added note, the readers should
> be reminded that patents are written in a style that is a hybrid of law and
> science (perhaps a suspension is more descriptive).
> Patent information is available on the internet. Here is a list of some
> http://www.uspto.gov/ This is the US Patent Office site. You can search
> for patents here, and get some information about patents in general. Later
> this year, or early next year, the full text and images of patents will be
> http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/searchhelp.html This is an IBM site where one
> can search for patents and view the entire document (it tends to be slow
> http://www-sul.stanford.edu/depts/swain/patent/patgeninf.html General patent
> Tim Morken, B.A. EMT(MSA), HTL(ASCP)
> Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
> 1600 Clifton Road
> Atlanta, GA 30333
> PH: 404-639-3964
> FAX: 404-639-3043
> other email: firstname.lastname@example.org
> On Mon, 22 May 2000 08:38:42 rueggp wrote:
> >You are exactly right. Once a method or technology has been published and sent to
> >public domain cyber space, I don't see how it could be patented. Of course it must be
> >referenced if used. I once looked into patenting a mixture of GMA which was developed
> >by a Polymer Chemist I was working with, the patent lawers told us that if the mix or
> >even a similar mix had ever been published we could not patent it. My understanding
> >was that you had to prove to the patent office that you invented this product, so my
> >question to the company who claims to have a patent on Tyramide use, is did you not
> >disclose all of the published material already out there on this substance?
> >If they do have a patent I think this has been given out without proper
> >consideration. I think patents and FDA approvals are being given too easily these
> >days. We have FDA approval of IHC methods for tests that are used in determining
> >treatment for patients when these tests have little or no room for error in an
> >enviroment not set up to operate without errors (histopathology).
> >My opinion.
> >Patsy Ruegg
> >"R.Wadley" wrote:
> >> At 12:14 05/18/2000 EDT, TSAGURU@aol.com wrote:
> >> >The recent discourse on the Histonet concerning Catalyzed Reporter
> >> Deposition technology, commercially known as Tyramide Signal ....>
> >> Dear TSAGURU@aol.com,
> >> I'm sorry I don't get your arguement. Just because some company files a
> >> patent means everybody else is forced to use that product? & is denied the
> >> opportunity to modify/improve the idea or its purpose? Why can't any
> >> individual in any lab contribute to the body of knowledge of science
> >> through the advancement of an old idea into a new one? Lets make this
> >> clear I'm saying information from a journal. I'm not saying nip down to
> >> the patent office & use the patent information. Frankly anybody who can
> >> make a method work from the information given in the Methods section of a
> >> journal article deserves a medal, its the first part of a paper to be
> >> minimised.
> >> What is the point of publishing anything at all if the knowledge cannot be
> >> used by the scientific community? I thought the whole idea about
> >> publishing was to let other scientists see what you were doing & if they
> >> can, comment, improve, or disprove it. You seem to be saying that this
> >> whole process goes out the window if some commercial company claims a
> >> patent. As far as I am concerned if there is information published in a
> >> journal, ie public knowledge, why can't I access & use this knowledge? OK,
> >> if I use that knowledge to create a product for my commercial benefit,
> >> thats wrong. But, if I use the idea, & acknowledge my sources, & improve
> >> the idea or use the idea in a better way, whats the hassle, haven't I
> >> expanded scientific knowledge?
> >> My 2 cents worth
> >> Regards
> >> Rob W.
> >> R. Wadley, B.App.Sc. M.L.S, Grad.Dip.Sc.MM
> >> Laboratory Manager
> >> Cellular Analysis Facility
> >> School of Microbiology & Immunology
> >> UNSW, New South Wales, Australia, 2052
> >> Ph (BH) +61 (2) 9385 3517
> >> Ph (AH) +61 (2) 9564 0570
> >> Fax +61 (2) 9385 1591
> >> Mobile 0411 874 470
> >> E-mail email@example.com
> >> www http://www.micro.unsw.edu.au/caf.html
> Get your FREE Email at http://mailcity.lycos.com
> Get your PERSONALIZED START PAGE at http://my.lycos.com
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>