FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W174764756> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W174764756 startingPage "1082" @default.
• W174764756 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION Suppose that you are a small time inventor who notices that women shave their legs an awful lot. You also notice that for most women electrolysis is too painful and slow and waxing too inconvenient, and you hit on the brilliant idea of pulling out women's unwanted hair at the root by having a helical spring rotate in a figure-eight motion inside a hand-held machine. To protect yourself, you get a United States patent, a European Patent under the European Patent Convention (EPC), and a host of other national patents. You then license your rights to a small start-up company to manufacture and sell your product worldwide. Luckily, your judgment of market needs is correct: the company quickly establishes an international presence and your device becomes a household name. As practical as your device is, however, it has one small but important flaw: it hurts. Now suppose another inventor creates a machine that serves the same purpose as your device, but is designed to minimize the pain. Instead of using a helical spring, your competitor's machine uses a rubber rod with slits. This inventor has approached your major competitor, a company that has been in the depilating business much longer than your little start-up, and that can quite easily destroy your market share. Upset and worried, you sue your competitor for infringement of your patent rights and demand an injunction prohibiting the sale of its device. Considering that you are now involved in dozens of suits worldwide, you are particularly pleased that your lawyer suggested that you get a European patent, because you figured that owning such a patent would save you time and money by insuring uniform conclusions in all EPC signatory countries. Imagine your surprise, however, when you discover that the courts within those signatory countries of the EPC could come to different conclusions. You thought that the law on patents would be the same in all European countries, but now in essentially the same case you have two dif ferent rulings for which there is no appeals court. This situation is not simply hypothetical; it is exactly what happened to Improver Corporation, the manufacturer of Epilady, when it sued Remington Products Limited for patent infringement. When Improver discovered that Remington was selling the Lady Remington, and decided to sue for patent infringement, its managers did not imagine that their patent infringement suit would shake the foundations of the European Union (EU). In the late 1980s and early 1990s, optimism about the EU was at a record high. The Cold War was over, the world anticipated a single currency, and the nations of Europe seemed intent on greater political, economic, and even military cooperation. The European Commission was busy creating laws that would help member states harmonize their laws and regulations. One potential barrier to closer trade might have been differences over patent law. Luckily, the European Patent Commission had been established in the 1970s to harmonize European patent law. The European Patent Commission's efforts in the early 1970s made possible a European-wide system of patent protection that provides for uniform protection of patents. The path toward an integrated patent law in late 1997 nonetheless remains littered with obstacles. The delegates to the European Patent Commission understood1 there to be two extreme positions in interpreting the scope of patent protection in the EU, typified by German and English patent law. The English method viewed the claims made by the inventor as fence posts; [w]hat is not claimed is disclaimed.2 The Germans, by contrast, used a guidepost approach. The German method viewed the patent as a central teaching that had to be protected, even if the teaching's scope was wider than the literal reading of the patent claims.3 As a result, the delegates attempted to create a compromise and provided for a via media between these two extremes. …" @default.
• W174764756 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W174764756 creator A5034617652 @default.
• W174764756 date "1998-04-01" @default.
• W174764756 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W174764756 title "Article 69 and European Patent Integration" @default.
• W174764756 hasPublicationYear "1998" @default.
• W174764756 type Work @default.
• W174764756 sameAs 174764756 @default.
• W174764756 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W174764756 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W174764756 hasAuthorship W174764756A5034617652 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C115910719 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C2777029862 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C2779913896 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C2780560020 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C2984145337 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C34974158 @default.
• W174764756 hasConcept C90673727 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C115910719 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C144133560 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C17744445 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C199539241 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C2524010 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C2777029862 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C2779913896 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C2780560020 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C2984145337 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C33923547 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C34974158 @default.
• W174764756 hasConceptScore W174764756C90673727 @default.
• W174764756 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W174764756 hasLocation W1747647561 @default.
• W174764756 hasOpenAccess W174764756 @default.
• W174764756 hasPrimaryLocation W1747647561 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W108609591 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W116792413 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W128306902 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W151895606 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W1995034993 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W1999335477 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2006309242 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2012926576 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2051227758 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2112345405 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2276416907 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2506537789 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W25943670 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W312588899 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W3193317800 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W78934019 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2184373007 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W2366673147 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W252830623 @default.
• W174764756 hasRelatedWork W73070277 @default.
• W174764756 hasVolume "92" @default.
• W174764756 isParatext "false" @default.
• W174764756 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W174764756 magId "174764756" @default.
• W174764756 workType "article" @default.