tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post109057100329312527..comments2024-03-28T11:16:43.146+00:00Comments on The IPKat: FRAMED? FIRST THE GOOD NEWS ...Verónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-1091101837861693402004-07-29T12:50:00.000+01:002004-07-29T12:50:00.000+01:00I am not sure the Lord Hoffmann of Chedworth will ...I am not sure the Lord Hoffmann of Chedworth will approve the improve. Lord Hoffmann has been attributed with saying that he was bound to say what he did in Improver because Catnic told him to do so. I do not know however if Lord Hoffmann did say such a thing. The difficulty with the Improver approach is that it works well for simple mechanical patents but, say some, it falls to pieces when one leaps up the technology ladder<br /><br />Practitioners do tend to look at the protocol to article 69 EPC more these days and indeed in Drill Safe the Court of Appeal did endorse the protocol, whilst at then same time approving improver. In the end the question to be asked is whether the public or the member of the public reading the patent leaves the document with a fair degree of certainty about what can or cannot be done. That seems more protocol than Improver.<br /><br />AshleyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com