After reading the landlord's question and answer, I feel that the landlord is really a very smart and attentive person, and the point of asking questions is very in place and profound.
in response to the landlord's inquiry, whether there is infringement should actually be considered from two aspects: first, whether there is infringement of patent rights; Second, whether it infringes on trade secrets.
In response to the landlord's question, I would like to add the following points:
The core point is to judge whether anyone (including the landlord's original employer) has the patent right to cover the product, which is the most important. Whether we apply for a patent or change the formula has no causal relationship with infringement. The key is to find such a patent, and then compare whether the product falls within the scope of protection of the patent. If there is no such patent, then there is no fear of infringement.
it doesn't infringe the patent right, but it doesn't mean it doesn't infringe the trade secret. If your former employer took measures to protect trade secrets, if you use them now, it may also infringe trade secrets. If it is serious, it may involve the crime of infringing trade secrets in the criminal law field. Due to the limited information you provide, it is difficult to judge whether the original employer has taken measures to protect trade secrets.
Using the formula or process of the original employer to apply for a patent does not necessarily lead to the conclusion you want, because the examiner may also miss the inspection.
On the whole, if the original employer of the landlord did not take measures to protect trade secrets and did not apply for a patent, then the technical scheme can be implemented. If the landlord makes further improvement on the basis of the technical scheme, then the improvement can be patented.