Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot, Jocelyn Bosse, Alessandro Cerri, Anastasiia Kyrylenko, Marcel Pemsel and Anna Maria Stein.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Antonios Baris (Book Review Editor), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent).

InternKats: Asude Sena Moya and Söğüt Atilla.
Home / Jeremy Phillips / IT'S A PATENT ...SHHHHHH, KEEP IT SECRET!

IT'S A PATENT ...SHHHHHH, KEEP IT SECRET!

-

The FAS is the Federation of American Scientists. The IPKat found this today on the FAS website:
The Invention Secrecy Act 1951 requires the US government to impose secrecy orders on certain patent applications that contain sensitive information, thereby restricting disclosure of the invention and withholding the grant of a patent. Remarkably, this requirement can be imposed even when the application is generated and entirely owned by a private individual or company.

There are several types of secrecy order which range in severity from simple prohibitions on export (but allowing other disclosure for legitimate business purposes) up to classification, requiring secure storage of the application and prohibition of all disclosure.

At the end of fiscal year 2004, there were 4,885 secrecy orders in effect.

The IPKat notes that equivalent provisions exist under the United Kingdom's Patents Act 1977, but that many other countries seem to manage quite well without them. Is it dangerous or irresponsible to publish specifications in some countries but not in others, he ponders. But Merpel asks, isn't a secret patent a contradiction in terms?

Best-kept secret here
Worst-kept secret here
Military secrets here
IT'S A PATENT ...SHHHHHH, KEEP IT SECRET! IT'S A PATENT ...SHHHHHH, KEEP IT SECRET! Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, July 11, 2005 Rating: 5

5 comments:

  1. AnonymousMonday, 11 July 2005 at 11:30:00 GMT+1

    Hi!

    Check the Patents Act 2004. The proviSIons of the 1977 Act have been modified. The burden is now on a patent applicant to decide whether security section should vet his/her application. This change was to enable e-filing by UK applicants to take place at the European Patent Office and simlar sites such at the International Bureau at Geneva.
    Also see article on patent secrecy in current issue of THE New ScientisT.
    In 1974 two UK patents were published, 1346409/410 but were withdrawn 10 months later. The numbers reveal no patent in the UK Patent Office Register database but provide two documents if entered into the Esp@cenet database. They cover VX gas manufacture.
    A 1954 US Patent in the name of a US government organisation gives a detailed but simple procedure for preparing warfare grade ricin from castor oil seeds. It can be downloaded from the USPTO site.
    For a real US patent horror story contact the cryptographer Dr Adi Shamur in Isreal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. JeremyMonday, 11 July 2005 at 13:01:00 GMT+1

    Are you sure? Admittedly, section 23 (which criminalises first filings by UK residents outside the UK) has been softened. But section 22 of the consolidated version of the Patents Act 1977, as amended to 2004, still appears to give the comptroller power to prohibit or restrict the publication of information "the publication of which might be prejudicial to national security".

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMonday, 11 July 2005 at 17:26:00 GMT+1

    I can't think of a single country that doesn't have such security provisions. Even if there are countries with such provisions, it would certainly not be permitted for a Brit to file a patent there.

    Merpel might wish to note that what usually happens is that the patent is not published: however, governments (usually the only legitimate markets for the inventions concerned)will pay a royalty fee should they wish to use the invention.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousMonday, 11 July 2005 at 17:49:00 GMT+1

    Both Keyrawn and Jeremy are right: an inventor can now first-file abroad if he is prepared to self-vet his invention, but the Comptroller has retained the power to pull inventions that are first-filed at the Patent Office. The Patent Office has published some information (Guideline 3) here: http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/ippd/issues/patsact/guidance.htm

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousFriday, 4 November 2005 at 03:21:00 GMT

    Sometimes, these gambles pay off, but there are occasions when they fail miserably,

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.