3 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
>> Now, this is all expected to change, to become more harmonious >> with the rest of the world. The changes that I've heard are >> 1) Go to first-to-file instead of first-to-invent Michael Shields wrote: > Does this mean that prior art would no longer invalidate a patent? No. It just moves the prior art date from the date of invention to the date of filing the patent application. dvw
David Van Wie writes: > > Does this mean that prior art would no longer invalidate a patent? > > No. It just moves the prior art date from the date of invention to the date > of filing the patent application. Can you explain that? It doesn't make much sense... .pm
David Van Wie writes: > It just moves the prior art date from the date of invention to the date > of filing the patent application. .pm writes: > Can you explain that? It doesn't make much sense... I'll ask a more specific question: What happens if the chronology goes like this ? (0) Alice invents a snaffleblort. (1) Bob invents a snaffleblort. (2) Bob files for a patent on a snaffleblort. From what you said, it would appear that Alice's prior art won't count when it comes to considering the validity of Bob's patent claim. Is that correct ? -Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>