U.S. Patents and 'formulas'

[drinkmorejava]

Originally posted by: StartingLine
This is one reason I think pharamaceutical companies charge so much in the US and charge so little overseas. They know that other countries will just find the chemical properties of their pills and develop them themselves if they charge high rates over there. So basically we produce the ground breaking medications, we have to pay the high prices while other countries get the drugs for dirt cheap because what can be done.

Actually, it's European price controls that keep their prices low. Over the last decade, the European Pharmaceutical Industry has declined significantly relative to their American counterparts because of this. However, more recently most have been allocating greater and greater research budgets per annum to their US subsidiaries to avoid some of this. For most markets, it is no longer possible for European companies to design and sell within the EU due to the minimal returns, thus, not only has the US, by necessity, become a haven for US drug companies, but also European firms. There is a reason why European Pharmaceuticals now spend less than 50% of their R&D investment within Europe (and right now, no, it's not India).

As far as drug patents go, between the US and the EU, they're moderated by the WTO such that they're not going to be stolen however, if a US firm were to not accept the price controls, or limit sales to a EU member country, they could make generics after WTO approval. While not specific to WTO control, you can look up the Bayer, France and Spain Adalat debacle.

 

[imported_Baloo]

Originally posted by: mrkun
I'm fairly certain there is are some types of international patents than many countries recognize.

I'm certain there is no such thing.


The U.S. has no authority over the sovereignty of other nations.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: jagec
Ask China.

LL

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Baloo
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: mrkun
I'm fairly certain there is are some types of international patents than many countries recognize.</end quote></div>

I'm certain there is no such thing.


The U.S. has no authority over the sovereignty of other nations.

There is an international system, but it is only really useful for streamlining the process of filing national applications in a variety of different countries. It's called the Patent Cooperation Treaty

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: patentman
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Baloo
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: mrkun
I'm fairly certain there is are some types of international patents than many countries recognize.</end quote></div>

I'm certain there is no such thing.


The U.S. has no authority over the sovereignty of other nations.</end quote></div>

There is an international system, but it is only really useful for streamlining the process of filing national applications in a variety of different countries. It's called the Patent Cooperation Treaty

Pwnt?

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Originally posted by: dbot

Originally posted by: Vonkhan
This is actually a huge issue in the pharmaceuticals market - for example a US company can spends millions of $s developing a drug and all an Indian company has to do is replicate it off a journal w/o paying any royalties. Easier said than done, but u get the idea.

Yea but most companies, especially large ones who invest a lot of money into development will apply for coverage across other countries within a year of developing their invention

Nope, most foreign countries employ an absolute novelty standard. Thus, large companies will file abroad first (usually through the PCT) and then file in the U.S.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
AFAIK, such things as recipes, perfumes, etc. are not patentable. Hence all the imitation perfumes that smell almost exactly the same as the real thing. Compare the ingredients in brand name foods with the ingredients of similar generic or small-time companies... almost identical.

You are correct in that mere combinations of known elements 9i.e., food recipes) are not usually patentable. They are, however, copyrightable.

With respect to perfumes, I can say with 100% certainty that they (and in fact, all other small molecule based inventions) ARE patentable, assuming they are novel and non-obvious. I do a lot of patent work for a huge cosmetics manufacturer, and one line of cases I handle for them is drawn to a perfume line.

 

[Dirigible]

Originally posted by: soxfan

Originally posted by: dbot

Originally posted by: Vonkhan
This is actually a huge issue in the pharmaceuticals market - for example a US company can spends millions of $s developing a drug and all an Indian company has to do is replicate it off a journal w/o paying any royalties. Easier said than done, but u get the idea.

Yea but most companies, especially large ones who invest a lot of money into development will apply for coverage across other countries within a year of developing their invention

Nope, most foreign countries employ an absolute novelty standard. Thus, large companies will file abroad first (usually through the PCT) and then file in the U.S.

This isn't necessary. You can file in the U.S. first, then you've got a year to file in other countries. The U.S. filing doesn't kill the novelty.

The absolute novelty standard in other countries means that if you lost novelty before filing in U.S., you can't file in most other countries. The different novelty standards means it may be possible to get a U.S. patent and not one in other countries.

Edit: And why did you resurrect this thread?

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Originally posted by: Dirigible

Originally posted by: soxfan

Originally posted by: dbot

Originally posted by: Vonkhan
This is actually a huge issue in the pharmaceuticals market - for example a US company can spends millions of $s developing a drug and all an Indian company has to do is replicate it off a journal w/o paying any royalties. Easier said than done, but u get the idea.

Yea but most companies, especially large ones who invest a lot of money into development will apply for coverage across other countries within a year of developing their invention

Nope, most foreign countries employ an absolute novelty standard. Thus, large companies will file abroad first (usually through the PCT) and then file in the U.S.

This isn't necessary. You can file in the U.S. first, then you've got a year to file in other countries. The U.S. filing doesn't kill the novelty.

The absolute novelty standard in other countries means that if you lost novelty before filing in U.S., you can't file in most other countries. The different novelty standards means it may be possible to get a U.S. patent and not one in other countries.

Edit: And why did you resurrect this thread?

I agree that if you file in the U.S. first, you can still file abroad (but if, and only if, you do not disclose your invention by some other means, and your application does not publish before filing a PCT or foreign antional stage application). I was not addressing this issue, however. Rather, I was responding to the indication that "most companies.... will apply for coverage across other countries within a year of developing their invention." This is not the case. Developing an invention is not the same as filing a patent application, in the U.S. or abroad.

And your interpretation of the absolute novelty standard is wrong. The absolute novelty standard, as applied under the European Patent Convention, for example, means that if your invention is publicly disclosed in ANY form (with very few exceptions), novelty is lost and the ability to patent that invention will be barred. It has nothing to do with whether an inventor files in the U.S. or not. The fact that you can still file abroad after filing in the U.S. is merely the result of the PCT and the fact that most absolute novelty countries except the filing of a patent application from the list of disclosures that will destroy novelty. TO be sure, publication of a U.S. application destroys novelty, within 1 year or not.

Asfo resurrecting this thread, I just did a keyword search for threads re: patent law because I work in the field. I responded in this thread because I felt some issues were still unresolved.

 

[Corporate Thug]

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offic...appxl_35_U_S_C_271.htm


see specifically 102(f)

(1) Whoever without authority supplies or causes to be supplied in or from the United States all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention, where such components are uncombined in whole or in part, in such manner as to actively induce the combination of such components outside of the United States in a manner that would infringe the patent if such combination occurred within the United States, shall be liable as an infringer.

(2) Whoever without authority supplies or causes to be supplied in or from the United States any component of a patented invention that is especially made or especially adapted for use in the invention and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, where such component is uncombined in whole or in part, knowing that such component is so made or adapted and intending that such component will be combined outside of the United States in a manner that would infringe the patent if such combination occurred within the United States, shall be liable as an infringer.

BTW, AFAIK, gatorade is a trade secret and not a patent. A patent would require a disclosure to the PTO for the first 18 months while the application is being reviewed, then full public disclosure.