Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

Patent Law for Computer Scientists: Steps to Protect Computer-Implemented Inventions 2010 ed. [Kõva köide]

3.67/5 (6 hinnangut Goodreads-ist)
, , ,
  • Formaat: Hardback, 194 pages, kõrgus x laius: 235x155 mm, kaal: 1050 g, XV, 194 p., 1 Hardback
  • Ilmumisaeg: 26-Feb-2010
  • Kirjastus: Springer-Verlag Berlin and Heidelberg GmbH & Co. K
  • ISBN-10: 3642050778
  • ISBN-13: 9783642050770
Teised raamatud teemal:
  • Kõva köide
  • Hind: 48,70 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Tavahind: 57,29 €
  • Säästad 15%
  • Raamatu kohalejõudmiseks kirjastusest kulub orienteeruvalt 2-4 nädalat
  • Kogus:
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Tasuta tarne
  • Tellimisaeg 2-4 nädalat
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
Patent Law for Computer Scientists: Steps to Protect Computer-Implemented Inventions 2010 ed.Suurem pilt
  • Formaat: Hardback, 194 pages, kõrgus x laius: 235x155 mm, kaal: 1050 g, XV, 194 p., 1 Hardback
  • Ilmumisaeg: 26-Feb-2010
  • Kirjastus: Springer-Verlag Berlin and Heidelberg GmbH & Co. K
  • ISBN-10: 3642050778
  • ISBN-13: 9783642050770
Teised raamatud teemal:
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/9783642050770.html
Märksõnad:

Patent laws are different in many countries, and inventors are sometimes at a loss to understand which basic requirements should be satisfied if an invention is to be granted a patent. This is particularly true for inventions implemented on a computer. While roughly a third of all applications (and granted patents) relate, in one way or another, to a computer, applications where the innovation mainly resides in software or in a business method are treated differently by the major patent offices in the US (USPTO), Japan (JPO), and Europe (EPO).

The authors start with a thorough introduction into patent laws and practices, as well as in related intellectual property rights, which also explains the procedures at the USPTO, JPO and EPO and, in particular, the peculiarities in the treatment of applications centering on software or computers. Based on this theoretical description, next they present in a very structured way a huge set of case studies from different areas like business methods, databases, graphical user interfaces, digital rights management, and many more. Each set starts with a rather short description and claim of the "invention", then explains the arguments a legal examiner will probably have, and eventually refines the description step by step, until all the reservations are resolved. All of these case studies are based on real-world examples, and will thus give an inexperienced developer an idea about the required level of detail and description he will have to provide.

Together, Closa, Gardiner, Giemsa and Machek have more than 70 years experience in the patent business. With their academic background in physics, electronic engineering, and computer science, they know about both the legal and the subject-based subtleties of computer-based inventions. With this book, they provide a guide to a patent examiner’s way of thinking in a clear and systematic manner, helping to prepare the first steps towards a successful patent application.



Written from over 70 years of experience, this overview explains patent laws across Europe, the US and Japan, and teaches readers how to think from a patent examiner’s perspective. Over 10 detailed case studies are presented from different computer science applications.

Part I
1 Introduction
3
1.1 Patents and Software, Basics
3
1.1.1 Short History of Patents
4
1.1.2 "Software" Patents
8
1.1.3 Other Intellectual Property Rights
15
1.1.4 Some Spectacular Patent Cases in the Software Field
17
1.2 Overview of Patent Practices in the USA, Japan and Europe
20
1.2.1 Comparison of US Patent and Trademark Office, Japanese Patent Office and European Patent Office
22
1.3 Structure of the Book and Presentation of Case Methodology
29
References
30
Part II
2 Business Methods
35
2.1 Example 1: Method of Selling
38
2.1.1 Description
38
2.1.2 Claim 1
38
2.1.3 Examiner Observations
39
2.2 Example 2: Method of Selling via a Network
40
2.2.1 Description
40
2.2.2 Claim 2
41
2.2.3 Examiner Observations
42
2.3 Example 3: Automatic Method of Selling via a Network
43
2.3.1 Description
43
2.3.2 Claim 3
44
2.3.3 Examiner Observations
45
2.4 Example 4: Automatic Method of Selling via a Network with Management of Power Production
46
2.4.1 Description
46
2.4.2 Claim 4
47
2.4.3 Examiner Observations
48
3 Administrative Methods
51
3.1 Example 1: Method of Data Gathering
52
3.1.1 Description
52
3.1.2 Claim I
52
3.1.3 Examiner Observations
53
3.2 Example 2: Method for Assimilating Administrative Information for Setting up an Agreement
54
3.2.1 Description
54
3.2.2 Claim 2
55
3.2.3 Examiner Observations
55
3.3 Example 3: Data Processing Device for Assimilating Administrative Information for Setting up an Agreement
57
3.3.1 Description
57
3.3.2 Claim 3
58
3.3.3 Examiner Observations
58
3.4 Example 4: Method of Arranging an Agreement via Encrypted Communication Channels
59
3.4.1 Description
59
3.4.2 Claim 4
61
3.4.3 Examiner Observations
61
4 Digital Rights Management
63
4.1 Example 1: Digital Content Promotion Method
63
4.1.1 Description
63
4.1.2 Claim I
64
4.1.3 Examiner Observations
65
4.2 Example 2: Computer-Implemented Content Promotion Method Using Encryption
66
4.2.1 Description
66
4.2.2 Claim 2
67
4.2.3 Examiner Observations
68
4.3 Example 3: Client–Server DRM System
69
4.3.1 Description
69
4.3.2 Claim 3
71
4.3.3 Examiner Observations
72
5 Database and Database Management System
75
5.1 Example 1: Simultaneous Access to a Database
77
5.1.1 Description
77
5.1.2 Claim 1
79
5.1.3 Examiner Observations
79
5.2 Example 2: Simultaneous Database Access with Time Management
80
5.2.1 Description
80
5.2.2 Claim 2
82
5.2.3 Examiner Observations
82
5.3 Example 3: Simultaneous Database Access with Automatic Time Management
83
5.3.1 Description
83
5.3.2 Claim 3
85
5.3.3 Examiner Observations
86
5.4 Conclusion
86
6 Billing and Payment
89
6.1 Example 1: Third-Party Based Billing and Payment Method
89
6.1.1 Description
89
6.1.2 Claim 1
91
6.1.3 Examiner Observations
92
6.2 Example 2: Card-Less Billing and Payment Process
93
6.2.1 Description
93
6.2.2 Claim 2
95
6.2.3 Examiner Observations
95
6.3 Example 3: Colour Matrix Based Billing and Payment System
97
6.3.1 Description
97
6.3.2 Claim 3
98
6.3.3 Examiner Observations
99
References
101
7 Graphical User Interfaces
103
7.1 Example 1: Spell-Checking System
105
7.1.1 Description
105
7.1.2 Claim 1
105
7.1.3 Examiner Observations
105
7.2 Example 2: Dynamic Spell-Checking System
106
7.2.1 Description
106
7.2.2 Claim 2
107
7.2.3 Examiner Observations
107
7.3 Example 3: Mixed Spell-Checking System
108
7.3.1 Description
108
7.3.2 Claim 3
110
7.3.3 Examiner Observations
110
7.4 Example 4: Smart Spell-Checking System
111
7.4.1 Description
111
7.4.2 Claim 4
113
7.4.3 Examiner Observations
114
7.5 Conclusion
114
8 Simulation
117
8.1 Example 1: Method for Simulating a Flight Situation
117
8.1.1 Description
117
8.1.2 Claim 1
118
8.1.3 Examiner Observations
118
8.2 Example 2: Computer-Implemented Aircraft Configuration
118
8.2.1 Description
118
8.2.2 Claim 2
120
8.2.3 Examiner Observations
120
8.3 Example 3: Computer-Implemented Flight Simulator
122
8.3.1 Description
122
8.3.2 Claim 3
123
8.3.3 Examiner Observations
123
8.4 Example 4: Special Purpose Helicopter Simulator
124
8.4.1 Description
124
8.4.2 Claim 4
125
8.4.3 Examiner Observations
126
8.5 Special Topic – Non-unity
126
8.5.1 Claim 5
127
8.5.2 Examiner Observations
127
References
128
9 Games
129
9.1 Example 1: Multi-player Game
130
9.1.1 Description
130
9.1.2 Claim 1
130
9.1.3 Examiner Observations
131
9.2 Example 2: Device for Multi-player Game
131
9.2.1 Description
131
9.2.2 Claim 2
133
9.2.3 Examiner Observations
133
9.3 Example 3: Hand-held Gaming Device
134
9.3.1 Description
134
9.3.2 Claim 3
136
9.3.3 Examiner Observations
136
9.4 Example 4: RFID-Based Multi-player Gaming System
137
9.4.1 Description
137
9.4.2 Claim 4
139
9.4.3 Examiner Observations
140
10 E-Learning
143
10.1 Example 1: Interactive Electronic Learning Tool
143
10.1.1 Description
143
10.1.2 Claim 1
144
10.1.3 Examiner Observations
144
10.2 Example 2: Internet-Based Interactive Learning System
145
10.2.1 Description
145
10.2.2 Claim 2
147
10.2.3 Examiner Observations
147
10.3 Example 3: Computer-Assisted Teaching System
148
10.3.1 Description
148
10.3.2 Claim 3
149
10.3.3 Examiner Observations
150
10.4 Example 4: Interactive Educational Globe System
150
10.4.1 Description
150
10.4.2 Claim 4
152
10.4.3 Examiner Observations
153
10.5 Special Topic–Lack of Disclosure
153
11 Medical Informatics
155
11.1 Example 1: Computer-Implemented Method for Managing Medical Treatment
156
11.1.1 Description
156
11.1.2 Claim 1
157
11.1.3 Examiner Observations
157
11.2 Example 2: Computer-Implemented Medical Pre-diagnosis
158
11.2.1 Description
158
11.2.2 Claim 2
159
11.2.3 Examiner Observations
159
11.3 Example 3: Computerized Method Supporting Medical Diagnosis
160
11.3.1 Description
160
11.3.2 Claim 3
161
11.3.3 Examiner Observations
161
11.4 Example 4: Computer-Controlled Surgery
162
11.4.1 Description
162
11.4.2 Claim 4
162
11.4.3 Examiner Observations
163
11.5 Conclusion
164
12 Mathematical Methods
165
12.1 Example 1: Mathematical Method for Defining Points of a Graph
166
12.1.1 Description
166
12.1.2 Claim 1
166
12.1.3 Examiner Observations
166
12.2 Example 2: Mathematical Method for Treating a Video Signal
167
12.2.1 Description
167
12.2.2 Claim 2
168
12.2.3 Examiner Observations
168
12.3 Conclusion
169
Part III
13 Case Law
173
13.1
Chapter 1: Introduction, General Case Law
174
13.1.1 T208/84
174
13.1.2 T26/86
175
13.1.3 T935/97
175
13.1.4 T1173/97
175
13.1.5 T163/85
175
13.1.6 T0769/92
176
13.1.7 T641/00
176
13.1.8 UK Court Decision: Astron Clinics et al., England and Wales High Court [ 2008] EWHC 85 (Pat)
177
13.1.9 UK Court Decision: Autonomy Corp. Ltd., England and Wales High Court [ 2008] EWHC 146 (Pat)
177
13.1.10 US Court Decision: KSR v. Teleflex, 550 US 398 (2007)
177
13.2
Chapter 2: Business Methods
177
13.2.1 US Court Decision: State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 23, 1998)
177
13.2.2 US Court Decision: In re Bilski, 545 F.3s 943, 88 USPO 2d 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2008)
177
13.2.3 UK Court Decision: Shopalotto.com, Judgement of the England and Wales High Court [ 2005] EWHC 2416 (Pat)
178
13.2.4 T931/95
178
13.2.5 T258/03
178
13.2.6 T959/03
179
13.3
Chapter 3: Administrative Methods
179
13.3.1 UK Court Decision: Aerotel/Macrossan, Judgement of the England and Wales Court of Appeal [ 2006], ECWA Civ 1371
179
13.3.2 T154/04
179
13.3.3 T172/03
179
13.3.4 T368/05
180
13.3.5 T845/05
180
13.4
Chapter 4: Digital Rights Management
180
13.4.1 T0953/04
180
13.4.2 T0860/05
180
13.4.3 T0043/06
180
13.5
Chapter 5: Database and Database Management System
181
13.5.1 T701/06
181
13.5.2 T787/06
181
13.6
Chapter 6: Billing and Payment
181
13.6.1 T1108106
181
13.7
Chapter 7: Graphical User Interfaces
181
13.7.1 T928/03
181
13.7.2 T1188/04
181
13.7.3 T125/04
182
13.7.4 T769/92
182
13.7.5 T643/00
183
13.8
Chapter 8: Simulation
183
13.8.1 T1227105
183
13.8.2 T0421/06
183
13.9
Chapter 9: Games
184
13.9.1 T1543/06
184
13.9.2 T1023/06
184
13.9.3 T336/07
184
13.10
Chapter 10: B-Learning
184
13.10.1 T0856/05
184
13.11
Chapter 11: Medical Informatics
185
13.11.1 G1/04
185
13.11.2 1342/06
185
13.11.3 T1814107
185
13.12
Chapter 12: Mathematical Methods
186
13.12.1 T1824/07
186
14 Conclusion and What Comes Next
187
Index 191
Daniel Closa studied in France and worked for Thomson until 1987, when he joined the EPO as an examiner in Berlin. He later transferred to Munich, gaining experience in various technical fields in the electronics area. He specialised in opposition procedures and passed the European Qualifying Examination for patent attorneys in 1998.



Alex Gardiner studied engineering at Aberdeen University in the UK. He joined the EPO in Munich in 1990. In 1997 he moved to the EPO in The Hague and there faced the rapid increase in business method applications. He developed new working practices and procedures at the EPO in related matters and trained examiners at all EPO sites accordingly. He returned to Munich in 2007.



Falk Giemsa studied computer science at LMU in Munich, Germany. He joined the EPO as an examiner in 2002 and works in the fields of business methods and educational and demonstration appliances.



Jörg Machek is a physicist, he received a Diploma from Vienna University of Technology, Austria, and a PhD from Brunel University, UK. After six years in manufacturing and semiconductor devices research, he joined the EPO in 1986. He is a director in charge of searching and examining computer-implemented inventions and methods for doing business.