Surgical exceptions to patentability -- clash of principles, few EPO examiners hurt

Surgical Exceptions to Patentability is the title of a seminar which the Intellectual Property Institute is holding on the afternoon of Wednesday 16 April. The speakers are Florian Leverve (co-author of Sweet & Maxwell's loose-leaf reference work European Patent Decisions and a researcher at the Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute) and IPKat team member Jeremy.

Right: having patched up the hospital's plumbing, Eric slips on his surgical mask and practises his latest bits of brain surgery, safe in the knowledge that no-one can see who he is.

According to the IPI's blurb:
"Of all the exclusions from patentability, most poignant is the bar on patenting methods of surgery, therapy or diagnosis practised on the human or animal body. While it seeks to release medical practitioners from the shackles of commercial monopoly and legal liability when choosing how best to treat their patients, many argue that its true effect is to stifle the creation, publication and promulgation of new techniques that save lives or improve their quality.

This seminar, based on a detailed study of decisions rendered by the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office, shows how the clash between conflicting principles has been resolved on the facts of individual instances, raising
questions as to whether the current law causes more problems than it resolves".
The venue is the London office of law firm Olswang, at 90 High Holborn, in the heart of Dickens' London. Registration starts at 4.30pm and the event gets underway at 5pm. Refreshments are rumoured to follow. If you're planning to attend, please email Anne Goldstein at the IPI so that you can be duly processed.
Surgical exceptions to patentability -- clash of principles, few EPO examiners hurt Surgical exceptions to patentability  --  clash of principles, few EPO examiners hurt Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, March 28, 2008 Rating: 5

No comments:

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:

Powered by Blogger.