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 / fees / patents / UK-IPO / Save £10 on your patenting costs

Save £10 on your patenting costs

- , ,
The IPKat has had his attention brought to the (rather tautologically-sounding) Trade Marks and Trade Marks and Patents (Fees) (Amendment) Rules 2009, SI 2009, No. 2089, which is going to be making a few changes to the Trade Marks Rules 2008, the Trade Marks (Fees) Rules 2008 and the Patents (Fees) Rules 2007 as from October 2009.

As far as the IPKat can gather, the changes are mainly to do with tinkering around the edges of the current set-up. Among other minor things, some new allowances will be made for electronic filing of applications. One change in particular is that a whopping £10 saving will in future be possible when paying application or search fees on a patent application, if filing electronically. Any savings may, however, be short-lived if other proposed changes (as reported by the IPKat here) go ahead as planned.
Save £10 on your patenting costs Save £10 on your patenting costs Reviewed by David Pearce on Wednesday, August 12, 2009 Rating: 5

5 comments:

  1. AnonymousWednesday, 12 August 2009 at 21:59:00 GMT+1

    On the contrary, if the proposed fee changes go ahead, the saving will continue and will increase (for search and examination fees) to £30 each. You'll get a bigger saving, despite paying more...

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousThursday, 13 August 2009 at 09:54:00 GMT+1

    You should be aware, however, of still paying the correct fee. In the US, a payment shortage of $10 for a annuity fee led to abandonement of the patent, which took some effort to correct (see: http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/08/patent-office-keeps-check-lets-patent-go-abandoned-for-being-10-short.html)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lex LexicalThursday, 13 August 2009 at 17:09:00 GMT+1

    Thanks for the post. The Patent charge changes are only a little less silly than the TM changes - I just posted about it after a battle for more info from the IPO:

    http://incidentalprobably.blogspot.com/2009/08/uk-ipos-recession-busting-discount-plan.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousFriday, 14 August 2009 at 14:58:00 GMT+1

    Lex Lexical - your blog suggests that it is difficult to find the announcement on the IPO website, when in fact there is a link to it - called "New trade mark fees and services (professional section)" in the "Latest News" section on the home web.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Lex LexicalFriday, 14 August 2009 at 15:19:00 GMT+1

    True! The casual visitor who espies that link will be able to find the announcement.

    But won't they be put off by the "professional section" note? Also, when they get there, it is obviously drafted for someone who is familiar with the process, not a casual applicant who doesn't yet know what a "series of marks" is and hasn't a clue what an examination report is to look like.

    The last thing to notice of course is that that list is continually updated, and by 1st October it's likely to have been pushed off the bottom!

    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.