Protection of biotechnology under Mexico's industrial property law: can El Raton de Harvard speak Spanish?
Article Abstract:
Mexico introduced the Law on the Promotion and Protection of Industrial Property, which became effective on Jun 28, 1991, to protect the biotechnology industry through patents. The law clearly defines what biotechnology is patentable and, though the law lacks the breadth of US biotechnology patent law, there is enough patent protection for most biotechnological processes. Among the biotechnology excluded from patents are animal and vegetable species, naturally occurring biological material, genetic material and human living matter.
Publication Name: Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0882-9098
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Patent developments in Eastern and Central Europe and the former Soviet Union
Article Abstract:
An ABA survey of patent attorneys in the former Soviet Union and Eastern and Central Europe indicates that the operations of national patent offices and the requirements for patent protection do vary among these nations. Nine former Soviet Republics have signed the Eurasian Patent Convention, which provides for centralized patent applications. Hungary and the Czech Republic may become signatories to the European Patent Convention if they join the European Union. Sample completed questionnaires are included.
Publication Name: Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0882-9098
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Shinpo-sei: Japanese inventive step meets U.S. non-obviousness
Article Abstract:
The Japanese patent law requirement of "inventive step" is very similar to the US patent law "non-obviousness" requirement, and the inventive step standard is a high enough hurdle that patent-flooding claims are unwarranted. The inquiries into how a claimed invention can be distinguished from prior art follow the same procedures in both nations. The Japanese Patent Office does require objective evidence of non-obviousness before the office has made a prima facie case, unlike US procedures.
Publication Name: Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0882-9098
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Protection of well known trademarks in China. New Japanese Trade Secret Act. New acronyms for patents, utility models and ornamental designs
- Abstracts: Product and process patent protection in biotechnology: too much or too little? Harmonization of the Patent Act and federal trade dress law: a critique of Vornado Air Circulation Systems v. Duracraft Corp
- Abstracts: IRS proposes regulations on plan loans under s. 72(p). New guidance on plan loans. Loan from VEBA to related employer is taxable reversion under section 4976
- Abstracts: Determining how much joint property is in a spouse's estate. Economic performance rules contain elections for real estate developers
- Abstracts: Toward a drop-out labor force. Will there be a new direction for American industrial relations? A hard look at the TEAM bill, the Sawyer substitute bill, and the Employee Involvement bill