Anticipation by public display

Secton 31. Anticipation by public display , etc.


An invention claimed in a complete specification shall not be deemed to have been anticipated by reason only of -

a) the display of the invention with the consent of the true and first inventor or a person deriving title from him at an industrial or other exhibition to which the provisions of this section have been extended by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette, or the use thereof with his consent for the purpose of such an exhibition in the place where it is held; or

b) the publication of any description of the invention in consequence of the display or use of the invention at any such exhibition as aforesaid; or

c) the use of the invention, after it has been displayed or used at any such exhibition as aforesaid and during the period of the exhibition, by any person without the consent of the true and first inventor or a person deriving title from him; or

d) the description of the invention in a paper read by the true and first inventor before a learned society or published with his consent in the transactions of such a society,

if the application for the patent is made by the true and first inventor or a person deriving title from him not later than twelve months after the opening of the exhibition or the reading or publication of the paper, as the case may be.

2011 Patent Agent Exam

The answers are to the best of my knowledge and input collected from Internet.

Answers

Paper-II




PART A(4X10=40 marks)



Question 1




1. It could be said that sharing views in private conversation does affect grant of patent.


2. The trial conducted by Rahman was in March 10 which was before filining. The trial was a reasonable one to test workability of invention and should be taken as anticipated.

3. His brother published details in 'Safe Houses' journal without his prior consent.so Rahmans invention is not anticipated as it is filed within 1 yr of publication.



Rahman's invention can not be anticipated under secions 29, 31 & 32.


Question 4

Answer to this question is related to the  provisions of sec. 49.

The points are
1. The  ship lost its way due to failure of navigation direction software.
2. The country Lumeria does not have any patent law
3.  the ship used The device which  was made in Lemuria



Fact

1. The ship used the nets with Bramha’s patented ultrasonic device.
2. It came to Indian water accidently.
 3.The ship was using the nets for fishing not for its actual needs .

Considering above,  the ship has infringed the  patent.

If you have any comments please lake here.

Patents rights on foreign vessels

Section 49 of Patents Act 1970 says this on the subject of patent rights in foreign vessels.


49. Patents rights not infringed when used on foreign vessels, etc., temporarily or accidentally in India


(1) Where a vessel or aircraft registered in a foreign country or a land vehicle owned by a person ordinarily resident in such country comes into India (including the territorial waters thereof) temporarily or accidentally only, the rights conferred by a patent for an invention shall not be deemed to be infringed by the use of the invention -



in the body of the vessel or in the machinery, tackle, apparatus or other accessories thereof, so far as the invention is used on board the vessel and for its actual needs only; or

in the construction or working of the aircraft or land vehicle or of the accessories thereof, as the case may be.

(2) This section shall not extend to vessels, aircraft or land vehicles owned by persons ordinarily resident in a foreign country the laws of which do not confer corresponding rights with respect to the use of inventions in vessels, air crafts or land vehicles owned by persons ordinarily resident in India while in the ports or within the territorial waters of that foreign country or otherwise within the jurisdiction of its courts.