1. In scientific and technological innovation, improving technology is novel.
It is one of the shortcuts to scientific and technological innovation to use intellectual property strategy and implement the secondary development of patents. It does not mean that one or more features of the improved technology are different from those in the patent independent claim, so it does not constitute infringement. A large number of improved inventions are completed on the basis of the existing technology, which are novel and do not infringe the patent rights of others. Study other people's patents, find defects, make improvements, and then file a patent application. This is a patent strategy often used by Japanese enterprises, and it is also an important measure for Japan to realize the founding of the country through science and technology. For example, the United Carbide Company of the United States invented the industrialized production method of carbon fiber in 1959, and Donglai Company of Japan introduced this basic patented technology in 1970, and started various research and development from basic materials to long fibers, and obtained a series of patents from application technology to improving the quality of carbon fiber, and its product market share also came from behind, ranking first in the world.
2. When writing patent documents, write multi-level claims and form various technical solutions to ensure the novelty of patent applications.
When writing patent documents, we should make full use of the novelty relationship between independent claims and subordinate claims. Because the dependent claims have more additional technical features than the independent claims, the fact that the independent claims are not novel does not mean that the dependent claims are not novel. Therefore, in order to prevent the whole claim from being declared invalid due to the loss of novelty of the independent claim, or to prevent others from carrying out secondary development on the basis of this patent, special attention should be paid to the writing of the independent claim and the dependent claim when writing the patent application documents. Independent claims should have a wide enough scope of protection, and dependent claims should gradually retreat, that is, different new technical features should be added to multiple dependent claims. The technical features of the preceding independent claims and dependent claims are limited layer by layer, so that one claim can contain many technical schemes, and some can even be as many as dozens, and the preferred scheme and the best scheme can be written into the dependent claims. Using this multi-level writing method can maximize the scope of protection, and it is not easy for others to deny the whole patent. Even if the technical scheme in the independent claim is declared invalid or rejected, the technical scheme in the dependent claim can still constitute a right item; In addition, because a patent contains a variety of technical solutions, it is not easy for others to improve on the basis of this patented technology.
3. Apply for a patent in time to avoid losing novelty.
Patent approval in China adopts the principle of applying first, that is, the patent right is granted to the individual or unit that applies for the patent first. Therefore, patent applicants should pay attention to applying for patents in time to prevent others from applying for patents first. In practice, there are often two wrong ideas that lead to wage loss: one is to make it public before applying for a patent; Some R&D personnel are eager to write papers, publish their inventions and make technical solutions public in order to show their academic level or promote their technical positions. Some enterprises, scientific research institutions and universities pay attention to the award of research results and are eager to promote and introduce their own research and development results to others, resulting in the loss of novelty. The second is to advertise first and then apply for a patent. In order to occupy the product market as soon as possible, some enterprises have begun to publicize their technological achievements before the invention is patented. For some inventions, it is often in advertising materials that the technology may be announced, thus losing the novelty of the patent.
Only by applying for patents in time, arranging patents in time, forming patent monopoly by using patent system and participating in market competition can enterprises be in an invincible position in the increasingly fierce global market competition. 1994, Viagra is still in the primary stage of research and its technology is not mature. In order to avoid competition from other enterprises that disclose basic patents first and then apply for improved patents, Pfizer submitted relevant patent applications for patent layout in China, and applied for basic patents and improved patents. After several twists and turns, in September 20001year, Pfizer received the "patent authorization notice" from China National Intellectual Property Administration, and the patent was in China. Pfizer's decrease in patent applications in the past year or two does not mean that the company has reduced its investment in research and development. It is precisely because foreign companies have long attached great importance to the research and development and production of new drugs. In the early stage of new drug research and development, they adopted the strategy of staking a horse, actively defending, applying for patent protection in advance, and arranging patents, which formed a pattern that a few large pharmaceutical companies occupied most of the drug research and development space, making it more difficult to open up new fields.
4. When preparing to apply for a patent or determine a new research topic, it is necessary to search for patent novelty.
Patent novelty retrieval refers to the retrieval of existing technologies published in various public publications before patent applicants, Patent examiners, patent agents and various national awards are declared. Before applying for a patent, it is necessary to understand the existing technology and judge whether the technical scheme for applying for a patent is novel. However, the knowledge of existing technology will affect the content of patent documents. If the technical problem to be solved by the invention is one of the contents of the patent specification, different understanding of the existing technology will lead to different problems. For example, if someone proposes an invention about a medicated pillow, and if there is no medicated pillow in the prior art, it should be pointed out in the invention that the purpose of the invention is to provide a pillow with health care function. If it is found that the medicated pillow already exists after retrieval, the only difference of its invention lies in the different kinds of traditional Chinese medicines contained in the medicated pillow, and the original declared invention purpose is no longer appropriate, so it should be changed to "provide a medicated pillow that can treat cervical spondylitis".
The technology that others have applied for patents has been made public, so there is no need to waste time and money on repeated research. A technology that is the same as or similar to the patented technology of others does not possess novelty and creativity, and can no longer be patented. Before scientific research or project establishment, if we can make full use of relevant information and search, we can accurately grasp the development situation at home and abroad, which can not only avoid repeated research and save costs, but also help to seize the time and grasp the initiative of scientific research and production. According to the statistics of the World Intellectual Property Organization, 90% of the most advanced scientific and technological inventions are collected in patent documents. If we can make full use of patent literature information in research and development, we can not only improve the starting point of research, but also save 60% of the funds and 40% of the time. nine
5. Literature disclosure destroys novelty.
The strategy of destroying novelty by making literature public is to prevent some opponents from applying for and obtaining patents by making inventions public. If an enterprise thinks that it is not necessary to obtain a patent right for its successfully developed technology or product, but is worried that other enterprises will bring threats to the enterprise if they obtain the patent right for this technology, it can take the method of pre-empting the disclosure of technical content to make it lose its novelty, thus preventing competitors from obtaining the patent right. Some international enterprises, such as IBM in the United States, often adopt this strategy; Some western newspapers and periodicals often publish technical documents provided by some enterprises, which aborts others' plans to apply for patents.
6. In patent litigation, we should also make full use of the novelty of patents.
In patent litigation, patent invalidation is the most commonly used measure against patent infringement charges. When the product is infringed, the defendant can judge whether the patent is novel. If he loses his novelty, he can file a "patent invalidation request" with the Chinese Intellectual Property Office on the grounds that "the patented technology does not have novelty". But in litigation, the key is to grasp the evidence of patent invalidation, especially the evidence of patent novelty loss. In 2006, Sony, a multinational giant, sued BYD, a well-known domestic company, for battery patent infringement, which ended with the Japanese Patent Office declaring Sony's patent invalid, which brought us great enlightenment. In the whole process of evidence collection and investigation, BYD first discussed and studied the structure and technical characteristics of Sony patent products with industry experts on the text of Sony patent announcement. Experts in the industry believe that Sony's invention patent should be an open technology, and the patented product has been widely used in the 1990s, lacking the novelty of the patent. In order to obtain strong evidence, BYD conducted extensive patent literature search and found out the comparative literature that was enough to declare Sony's invention patent invalid. At the same time, BYD actively searched for products with the same or similar patented products, and finally found the invoices of products with the same or similar patented products sold by Sony before the filing date of patent application among tens of millions of products sold by a company in Hong Kong, which laid the foundation for the final invalidation and victory.