patent

• n

• 特許
• 独特のもの。しるし、特徴

• vt.
• adj.

• 特許の、特許権を持つ。商標を登録された
• (医)開存性の、開通性の。開放されている
• 明白な、歴然たる、判然とした、見え透いた

関

patency, trademark

　 　 　 　 　 　 　

WordNet

1. obtain a patent for; "Should I patent this invention?"
2. an official document granting a right or privilege (同)letters_patent
3. a document granting an inventor sole rights to an invention (同)patent of invention
4. (of a bodily tube or passageway) open; affording free passage; "patent ductus arteriosus"
5. grant rights to; grant a patent for
6. make open to sight or notice; "His behavior has patented an embarrassing fact about him"
7. register the trademark of; "The company trademarked their new gadget"
8. a formally registered symbol identifying the manufacturer or distributor of a product
9. the openness (lack of obstruction) of a bodily passage or duct
10. (of devices and processes) not protected by patent; "unpatented inventions"
11. an application for sole rights to an invention
12. violation of the rights secured by a patent
13. the top of the head (同)poll, crown
14. liver or meat or fowl finely minced or ground and variously seasoned
15. (of devices and processes) protected by patent; "they are patented inventions"

PrepTutorEJDIC

1. 『特許』,特許権,パテント / 『専売特許品』,特許となっている製法 / 専売特許証 / (一般に特権などを授ける)公式証書 / 《名詞の前にのみ用いて》専売特許の / 《名詞の前にのみ用いて》《英話》賢い,独特な,まねのできない / 明白な / …‘の'特許[権]を取る / …‘に'特許[権]を与える
2. 商標 / (ある人に特有の)行動様式 / …‘に'商標を付ける / …‘を'商標として登録する
3. 《複数形》特許,特許状
4. 頭,脳天;頭脳
5. パテ,肉パイ(レバー肉・魚などを小麦粉で練った菓子)
6. パテナ(聖体祭儀のときパンをのせる金属製の皿)

Wikipedia preview

出典(authority):フリー百科事典『ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』「2013/10/26 07:19:54」(JST)

wiki ja

[Wiki ja表示]

特許（とっきょ、英: Patent、パテント）とは、法令の定める手続により、国が発明者またはその承継人に対し、特許権を付与する行政行為。

概要

特許は、有用な発明をなした発明者またはその承継人に対し、その発明の公開の代償として、一定期間、その発明を独占的に使用しうる権利（特許権）を国が付与するものである。特許権は、無体物（物ではない、形のないもの）である発明に排他的支配権を設定することから、知的財産権のひとつとされる。日本の特許法においては、特許制度は、特許権によって発明の保護と利用を図ることにより、発明を奨励し、また産業の発達に寄与することを目的とするとされている（特許法1条）。

特許制度の歴史

英語で特許を意味する"patent"の語源は、ラテン語の"patentes"（公開する）であるといわれている。

中世ヨーロッパにおいては、絶対君主制の下で王が報償や恩恵として特許状（letters patent）を与え、商工業を独占する特権や、発明を排他的に実施する特権を付与することがあった。しかし、これは恣意的なもので、制度として確立したものではなかった。

イタリアのヴェネツィア共和国では、1443年には発明に対して特許が与えられていたとされ、1474年には世界最古の成文特許法である発明者条例が公布された。このことから、近代特許制度はヴェネツィアで誕生したとされている。

1623年にイギリス議会で制定された専売条例（Statute of Monopolies）は、それまで国王が恣意的に認めてきた特許を制限し、発明と新規事業のみを対象として、一定期間（最長14年間）に限って独占権を認めるとともに、権利侵害に対する救済として損害賠償請求を規定した。この条例の制定によって、近代的な特許制度の基本的な考え方が確立されたとされる。また、この条例は、ジェームズ・ワットの蒸気機関（1769年）や、リチャード・アークライトの水車紡績機（1771年）等の画期的な発明がなされる環境を整え、英国に産業革命をもたらしたと評価されている。

1883年には、工業所有権の保護に関するパリ条約（パリ条約）が締結され、内国民待遇の原則、優先権制度、各国工業所有権独立の原則など、特許に関する国際的な基本原則が定められた。

日本では、明治維新後の1871年（明治4年）に最初の特許法である専売略規則（明治4年太政官布告第175号）が公布された。しかし、この制度は利用されず、当局も充分な運用ができなかったため、翌年には施行が中止された。その後、1885年（明治18年）4月18日に本格的な特許法である専売特許条例（明治18年太政官布告第7号）が公布･施行された。1888年（明治21年）には審査主義を確立した特許条例（明治21年勅令第84号）が公布され、1899年（明治32年）には旧特許法（明治32年法律第36号）を制定してパリ条約に加入した。1922年（大正11年）に施行された大正10年法では、先願主義が採用され現在の特許法の基礎が作られた。現行特許法（昭和34年法律第121号）は、1959年（昭和34年）に全面改正された昭和34年法を累次、部分改正したものである。

特許制度の意義

発明に対して特許制度により独占的権利を与える根拠としては、いくつかの説が提唱されている。それらを大別すると、基本権（自然権）説と産業政策説の2つに分けられる。現在では、産業政策説に属する公開代償説が最も広く受け入れられている。

基本権（自然権）説

発明に対する権利は、人間に与えられた基本的な権利（自然権）であるとする説。1791年のフランス特許法等で採用された考え方である。財産権説と受益権説に細分される。

財産権説

発明に対する権利は財産権であるとする説。

この説によれば、特許法は、権利を創設するのではなく、規制するものであるということになる。

この説では、各国で独立して特許が与えられること（属地性）、複数の者が独自に同じ発明を完成しても最初に出願（または発明）した者しか権利を取得できないこと、出願をしなければ権利を取得できないことを説明することができない。

受益権説

発明が社会に貢献した程度に比例して、その報酬を受ける権利があるとする説。

この説では、上記の財産権説の矛盾に加えて、発明の社会への貢献度とその報酬とが必ずしも比例しないことを説明することができない。

産業政策説

発明に対する権利は、国の産業政策として発明の権利保護を図るために与えられるとする説。公開代償説、発明奨励説、過当競争防止説（競業秩序説）に細分される。

公開代償説

仮に、発明者に独占権を認めないとすると、発明が他人に模倣されてしまうために、発明者は発明を秘密にし、その結果、発明が社会的に活用されないことになる。このため、新規で有用な発明を世の中に提供した代償として、一定期間、その発明を排他的に独占する権利を付与するとする説で、現在最も広く支持されている説である。

発明奨励説

仮に、発明者に独占権を認めないとすると、発明者は自ら発明したにもかかわらず他者に対して優位な立場に立つことができず、発明を行ったり、それを事業に結びつける意欲を失い、その結果、発明が社会的に活用されないことになる。そこで、発明を奨励するために、一定期間、その発明を排他的に独占する権利を付与するとする説である。

過当競争防止説（競業秩序説）

仮に、発明者に独占権を認めないとすると、発明が他人に模倣されてしまうために、発明者や企業は、他人の発明を模倣することや、自分の発明を模倣されないようにすることへ注力し、過当競争状態が生じ、発明自体に対する意欲や投資のインセンティブが働かない。そこで、過当な競争を防止するために、一定期間、その発明を排他的に独占する権利を付与するとする説である。

各国の特許制度

以下の国の特許制度についてはそれぞれの項目を参照。

• 日本の特許制度
• 米国の特許制度
• ヨーロッパの特許制度
• 中国の特許制度
• 韓国の特許制度

検索サービス

公的な特許検索サービスとして、日本では独立行政法人工業所有権情報・研修館が運営する特許電子図書館（IPDL）があり、特許以外にも実用新案、意匠及び商標等の産業財産権をインターネット上で調べることができる。また、欧州特許庁（EPO）のesp@cenetに代表されるように、日本以外の各国でも同様のサービスが提供されている。

さらに、民間企業も有料又は無料のサービスを提供している。日本では、パトリス、日立製作所、NRIサイバーパテント、トムソン・ロイター等が有料のサービスを提供している。また、米国の特許は2006年12月13日からGoogleのGoogle Patentsでも検索できるようになっている。

パテントマップ

パテントマップとは、特許に関する情報を整理・分析・加工して図面、グラフ、表などで表したもので、特許マップ、又は特許地図とも呼ばれている。 パテントマップを見ることで、特許をマクロな視点から把握することができる。 大企業同士の特許係争ともなると出願全件の侵害・非侵害を調べることが現実的ではない場合もあり、交渉の材料としてパテントマップが用いられることもある。 パテントマップの作成業者は、特許庁ホームページ上特許情報提供事業者リスト集から調べることができる。

企業がパテントマップを活用するメリット

• ライバル企業の出願動向を把握できる。
• 新規案件を依頼するため、コンフリクトが発生しない特許事務所を調べることができる。
• 特定技術の出願動向が把握できる。

特許事務所がパテントマップを活用するメリット

• 新規の営業先企業を調べることができる。
• ライバルとなる特許事務所の動向を把握することができる。

弁理士や特許明細書作成担当者がパテントマップを活用するメリット

• 自分の得意とする技術を必要としている転職先や就職先を探すことができる。

技術者がパテントマップを活用するメリット

• 技術の動向を把握した上で、新規製品の開発計画が立案できる。
• 出願の動向を観測する事で、穴場の分野を狙って発明することができる。

コンサルタントがパテントマップを活用するメリット

• 技術の動向を把握することができる。
• パテントマップを定点観測することで、ある程度今後の技術動向を予測することができる。

脚注・出典

関連項目

• 知的財産権
• 産業財産権（工業所有権）
• 特許法
• 特許・実用新案審査基準
• 弁理士
• 世界知的所有権機関
• 特許権侵害訴訟
• サブマリン特許
• パテント・トロール
• ソフトウェア特許

外部リンク

• 特許・実用新案とは 特許庁ホームページ

wiki en

[Wiki en表示]

For other uses, see Patent (disambiguation).

Patent law
Overviews
Patents History Economics Societal views
Basic concepts
Application Prosecution Licensing Infringement Valuation
Patentability
Patentable subject matter Novelty Utility Inventive step and non-obviousness Industrial applicability Person skilled in the art Prior art Inventorship
Additional requirements
Sufficiency of disclosure Unity of invention
By region / country
Patent Cooperation Treaty Australia Canada China Europe India Japan United States
By specific subject matter
Biological Business method Chemical Insurance Software Tax
See also
Category Glossary

U.S patent

A patent (/ˈpætənt/ or /ˈpeɪtənt/) is a set of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time, in exchange for the public disclosure of the invention. An invention is a solution to a specific technological problem, and may be a product or a process. Patents are a form of intellectual property.

The procedure for granting patents, requirements placed on the patentee, and the extent of the exclusive rights vary widely between countries according to national laws and international agreements. Typically, however, a patent application must include one or more claims that define the invention. These claims must meet relevant patentability requirements, such as novelty and non-obviousness. The exclusive right granted to a patentee in most countries is the right to prevent others from making, using, selling, or distributing the patented invention without permission.

Under the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, patents should be available in WTO member states for any invention, in all fields of technology, and the term of protection available should be a minimum of twenty years. Nevertheless, there are variations on what is patentable subject matter from country to country.

Definition

The word patent originates from the Latin patere, which means "to lay open" (i.e., to make available for public inspection). More directly, it is a shortened version of the term letters patent, which was a royal decree granting exclusive rights to a person, predating the modern patent system. Similar grants included land patents, which were land grants by early state governments in the USA, and printing patents, a precursor of modern copyright.

In modern usage, the term patent usually refers to the right granted to anyone who invents any new, useful, and non-obvious process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter. Some other types of intellectual property rights are also called patents in some jurisdictions: industrial design rights are called design patents in the US, plant breeders' rights are sometimes called plant patents, and utility models and Gebrauchsmuster are sometimes called petty patents or innovation patents.

The additional qualification utility patent is sometimes used (primarily in the US) to distinguish the primary meaning from these other types of patents. Particular species of patents for inventions include biological patents, business method patents, chemical patents and software patents.

History

Main article: History of patent law

U.S. patents granted, 1790–2010.

Patents in force in 2000

In 500 BC, in the Greek city of Sybaris (in what is now southern Italy), "Encouragement was held out to all who should discover any new refinement in luxury, the profits arising from which were secured to the inventor by patent for the space of a year."

The Florentine architect Filippo Brunelleschi received a three-year patent for a barge with hoisting gear, that carried marble along the Arno River in 1421. In 1449, King Henry VI granted the first English patent with a license of 20 years to John of Utynam for introducing the making of colored glass to England.

Patents in the modern sense originated in 1474, when the Republic of Venice enacted a decree that new and inventive devices, once put into practice, had to be communicated to the Republic to obtain the right to prevent others from using them.

England followed with the Statute of Monopolies in 1624, under King James I, which declared that patents could only be granted for "...projects of new invention." During the reign of Queen Anne (1702–14), lawyers of the English Court developed the requirement that a written description of the invention must be submitted. The patent systems in many other countries, including Australia, are based on British law and can be traced back to the Statute of Monopolies.

In 1641, Samuel Winslow was granted the first patent in North America by the Massachusetts General Court for a new process for making salt.

In France, patents were granted by the monarchy and by other institutions like the "Maison du Roi". The Academy examined novelty. Examinations were generally done in secret with no requirement to publish a description of the invention. Actual use of the invention was deemed adequate disclosure to the public. The modern French patent system was created during the Revolution in 1791. Patents were granted without examination since inventor's right was considered as a natural one

In the United States, during the colonial period and Articles of Confederation years (1778–89), several states adopted their own patent systems. The U.S. Constitution authorizes the American patent system in Article One, Section 8(8) which states:

The Congress shall have power...To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries...

The first Congress adopted a Patent Act in 1790, and the first patent was issued under this Act on July 31, 1790 (to Samuel Hopkins of Vermont for a potash production technique).

Law

Intellectual property law
Primary rights
Copyright Patent Trademark Trade secret Authors' rights Related rights Moral rights Utility model Geographical indication
Sui generis rights
Database right Indigenous intellectual property Industrial design right Mask work Plant breeders' rights Supplementary protection certificate
Related topics
Societal views Orphan works Public domain Traditional safety valves Outline of intellectual property

Effects

A patent does not give a right to make or use or sell an invention. Rather, a patent provides the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the patented invention for the term of the patent, which is usually 20 years from the filing date subject to the payment of maintenance fees. A patent is a limited property right the government gives inventors in exchange for their agreement to share details of their inventions with the public. Like any other property right, it may be sold, licensed, mortgaged, assigned or transferred, given away, or simply abandoned.

A patent, being an exclusionary right, does not necessarily give the patent owner the right to exploit the patent. For example, many inventions are improvements of prior inventions that may still be covered by someone else's patent. If an inventor obtains a patent on improvements to an existing invention which is still under patent, they can only legally use the improved invention if the patent holder of the original invention gives permission, which they may refuse.

Some countries have "working provisions" that require the invention be exploited in the jurisdiction it covers. Consequences of not working an invention vary from one country to another, ranging from revocation of the patent rights to the awarding of a compulsory license awarded by the courts to a party wishing to exploit a patented invention. The patentee has the opportunity to challenge the revocation or license, but is usually required to provide evidence that the reasonable requirements of the public have been met by the working of invention.

Enforcement

Patents can generally only be enforced through civil lawsuits (for example, for a U.S. patent, by an action for patent infringement in a United States federal court), although some countries (such as France and Austria) have criminal penalties for wanton infringement. Typically, the patent owner seeks monetary compensation for past infringement, and seeks an injunction that prohibits the defendant from engaging in future acts of infringement. To prove infringement, the patent owner must establish that the accused infringer practises all the requirements of at least one of the claims of the patent. (In many jurisdictions the scope of the patent may not be limited to what is literally stated in the claims, for example due to the doctrine of equivalents).

An accused infringer has the right to challenge the validity of the patent allegedly being infringed in a countersuit. A patent can be found invalid on grounds described in the relevant patent laws, which vary between countries. Often, the grounds are a subset of requirements for patentability in the relevant country. Although an infringer is generally free to rely on any available ground of invalidity (such as a prior publication, for example), some countries have sanctions to prevent the same validity questions being relitigated. An example is the UK Certificate of contested validity.

Patent licensing agreements are contracts in which the patent owner (the licensor) agrees to grant the licensee the right to make, use, sell, and/or import the claimed invention, usually in return for a royalty or other compensation. It is common for companies engaged in complex technical fields to enter into multiple license agreements associated with the production of a single product. Moreover, it is equally common for competitors in such fields to license patents to each other under cross-licensing agreements in order to share the benefits of using each other's patented inventions.

Ownership

In most countries, both natural persons and corporate entities may apply for a patent. In the United States, however, only the inventor(s) may apply for a patent although it may be assigned to a corporate entity subsequently and inventors may be required to assign inventions to their employers under an employment contract. In most European countries, ownership of an invention may pass from the inventor to their employer by rule of law if the invention was made in the course of the inventor's normal or specifically assigned employment duties, where an invention might reasonably be expected to result from carrying out those duties, or if the inventor had a special obligation to further the interests of the employer's company.

The plate of the Martin ejector seat of a military aircraft, stating that the design is covered by multiple patents in Britain, South Africa, Canada and "others". Dübendorf Museum of Military Aviation.

The inventors, their successors or their assignees become the proprietors of the patent when and if it is granted. If a patent is granted to more than one proprietor, the laws of the country in question and any agreement between the proprietors may affect the extent to which each proprietor can exploit the patent. For example, in some countries, each proprietor may freely license or assign their rights in the patent to another person while the law in other countries prohibits such actions without the permission of the other proprietor(s).

The ability to assign ownership rights increases the liquidity of a patent as property. Inventors can obtain patents and then sell them to third parties. The third parties then own the patents and have the same rights to prevent others from exploiting the claimed inventions, as if they had originally made the inventions themselves.

Governing laws

See also: Patent law by countries and regions

The grant and enforcement of patents are governed by national laws, and also by international treaties, where those treaties have been given effect in national laws. Patents are granted by national or regional patent offices. A given patent is therefore only useful for protecting an invention in the country in which that patent is granted. In other words, patent law is territorial in nature. When a patent application is published, the invention disclosed in the application becomes prior art and enters the public domain (if not protected by other patents) in countries where a patent applicant does not seek protection, the application thus generally becoming prior art against anyone (including the applicant) who might seek patent protection for the invention in those countries.

Commonly, a nation forms a patent office with responsibility for operating that nation's patent system, within the relevant patent laws. The patent office generally has responsibility for the grant of patents, with infringement being the remit of national courts.

The authority for patent statutes in different countries varies. In the UK, substantive patent law is contained in the Patents Act 1977 as amended. In the United States, the Constitution empowers Congress to make laws to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts..." The laws Congress passed are codified in Title 35 of the United States Code and created the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

There is a trend towards global harmonization of patent laws, with the World Trade Organization (WTO) being particularly active in this area. The TRIPs Agreement has been largely successful in providing a forum for nations to agree on an aligned set of patent laws. Conformity with the TRIPs agreement is a requirement of admission to the WTO and so compliance is seen by many nations as important. This has also led to many developing nations, which may historically have developed different laws to aid their development, enforcing patents laws in line with global practice.

In addition, there are international treaty procedures, such as the procedures under the European Patent Convention (EPC) [constituting the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg)], that centralize some portion of the filing and examination procedure. Similar arrangements exist among the member states of ARIPO and OAPI, the analogous treaties among African countries, and the nine CIS member states that have formed the Eurasian Patent Organization. A key international convention relating to patents is the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, initially signed in 1883. The Paris Convention sets out a range of basic rules relating to patents, and although the convention does not have direct legal effect in all national jurisdictions, the principles of the convention are incorporated into all notable current patent systems. The most significant aspect of the convention is the provision of the right to claim priority: filing an application in any one member state of the Paris Convention preserves the right for one year to file in any other member state, and receive the benefit of the original filing date. Another key treaty is the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), administered by WIPO and covering more than 140 countries.

Application and prosecution

Main articles: Patent application and Patent prosecution

A patent is requested by filing a written application at the relevant patent office. The person or company filing the application is referred to as "the applicant". The applicant may be the inventor or its assignee. The application contains a description of how to make and use the invention that must provide sufficient detail for a person skilled in the art (i.e., the relevant area of technology) to make and use the invention. In some countries there are requirements for providing specific information such as the usefulness of the invention, the best mode of performing the invention known to the inventor, or the technical problem or problems solved by the invention. Drawings illustrating the invention may also be provided.

The application also includes one or more claims that define what a patent covers or the "scope of protection".

After filing, an application is often referred to as "patent pending". While this term does not confer legal protection, and a patent cannot be enforced until granted, it serves to provide warning to potential infringers that if the patent is issued, they may be liable for damages.

Once filed, a patent application is "prosecuted". A patent examiner reviews the patent application to determine if it meets the patentability requirements of that country. If the application does not comply, objections are communicated to the applicant or their patent agent or attorney through an Office action, to which the applicant may respond. The number of Office actions and responses that may occur vary from country to country, but eventually a final rejection is sent by the patent office, or the patent application is granted, which after the payment of additional fees, leads to an issued, enforceable patent. In some jurisdictions, there are opportunities for third parties to bring an opposition proceeding between grant and issuance, or post-issuance.

Once granted the patent is subject in most countries to renewal fees to keep the patent in force. These fees are generally payable on a yearly basis. Some countries or regional patent offices (e.g. the European Patent Office) also require annual renewal fees to be paid for a patent application before it is granted.

Costs

The costs of preparing and filing a patent application, prosecuting it until grant and maintaining the patent vary from one jurisdiction to another, and may also be dependent upon the type and complexity of the invention, and on the type of patent.

The European Patent Office estimated in 2005 that the average cost of obtaining a European patent (via a Euro-direct application, i.e. not based on a PCT application) and maintaining the patent for a 10-year term was around €32,000. Since the London Agreement entered into force on May 1, 2008, this estimation is however no longer up-to-date, since fewer translations are required.

In the United States, in 2000 the cost of obtaining a patent (patent prosecution) was estimated to be from $10,000 to $30,000 per patent. When patent litigation is involved (which in year 1999 happened in about 1,600 cases compared to 153,000 patents issued in the same year), costs increase significantly: while 95% of patent litigation cases are settled out of court, but when the case reaches the court, direct legal costs of patent litigation are on average in the order of a million dollars per case, not including associated business costs.

Alternatives to applying for a patent

A defensive publication is the act of publishing a detailed description of a new invention without patenting it, so as to establish prior art and public identification as the creator/originator of an invention, although a defensive publication can also be anonymous. A defensive publication prevents others from later being able to patent the invention.

A trade secret is the act of not disclosing the methods by which a complex invention works or how a chemical is formulated. Trade secrets are protected by nondisclosure agreements and employment law that prevents reverse engineering and information leaks such as breaches of confidentiality and corporate espionage. Compared to patents, the advantages of trade secrets are that a trade secret is not limited in time (it "continues indefinitely as long as the secret is not revealed to the public", whereas a patent is only in force for a specified time, after which others may freely copy the invention), a trade secret does not imply any registration costs, has an immediate effect, does not require compliance with any formalities, and does not imply any disclosure of the invention to the public. The disadvantages of trade secrets include that "others may be able to legally discover the secret and be thereafter entitled to use it", "others may obtain patent protection for legally discovered secrets", and a trade secret is more difficult to enforce than a patent.

Economics

For more details on this topic, see Economics and patents.

Rationale

Primary incentives embodied in the patent system include incentives to invent in the first place; to disclose the invention once made; to invest the sums necessary to experiment, produce and market the invention; and to design around and improve upon earlier patents.

1. Patents provide incentives for economically efficient research and development (R&D). A study conducted annually by the IPTS shows that the 2,000 largest global companies invested more than 430 billion euros in 2008 in their R&D departments. If the investments can be considered as inputs of R&D, real products and patents are the outputs. Based on these groups, a project named Corporate Invention Board, had measured and analyzed the patent portfolios to produce an original picture of their technological profiles. Supporters of patents argue that without patent protection, R&D spending would be significantly less or eliminated altogether, limiting the possibility of technological advances or breakthroughs.^{[citation needed]} Corporations would be much more conservative about the R&D investments they made, as third parties would be free to exploit any developments. This second justification is closely related to the basic ideas underlying traditional property rights.
2. In accordance with the original definition of the term "patent," patents are intended to facilitate and encourage disclosure of innovations into the public domain for the common good. If inventors did not have the legal protection of patents, in many cases, they might prefer or tend to keep their inventions secret.^{[citation needed]} Awarding patents generally makes the details of new technology publicly available, for exploitation by anyone after the patent expires, or for further improvement by other inventors. Furthermore, when a patent's term has expired, the public record ensures that the patentee's invention is not lost to humanity.
3. In many industries (especially those with high fixed costs and either low marginal costs or low reverse engineering costs — computer processors, and pharmaceuticals for example), once an invention exists, the cost of commercialization (testing, tooling up a factory, developing a market, etc.) is far more than the initial conception cost. (For example, the internal "rule of thumb" at several computer companies in the 1980s was that post-R&D costs were 7-to-1). Unless there is some way to prevent copies from competing at the marginal cost of production, companies don't invest in making the invention a product.

One effect of modern patent usage is that a small-time inventor can use the exclusive right status to become a licensor. This allows the inventor to accumulate capital from licensing the invention and may allow innovation to occur because he or she may choose not to manage a manufacturing buildup for the invention. Thus the inventor's time and energy can be spent on pure innovation, allowing others to concentrate on manufacturability.

Another effect of modern patent usage is to both enable and incentivize competitors to design around (or to "invent around" according to R S Praveen Raj) the patented invention. This may promote healthy competition among manufacturers, resulting in gradual improvements of the technology base. This may help augment national economies and confer better living standards to the citizens. The 1970 Indian Patent Act allowed the Indian pharmaceutical industry to develop local technological capabilities in this industry. This act transformed India from a bulk importer of pharmaceutical drugs to a leading exporter. The rapid evolution of Indian pharmaceutical industry since the mid-1970s highlights the fact that the design of the patent act was instrumental in building local capabilities even in a developing country like India.

Criticism

Main articles: Societal views on patents and Criticism of intellectual property

As state-granted monopolies, patents have been criticized as inconsistent with free trade. On that basis, in 1869 the Netherlands abolished patents, and did not reintroduce them until 1912.

Patents have also been criticized for being granted on already-known inventions, with some complaining in the United States that the USPTO fails "to do a serious job of examining patents, thus allowing bad patents to slip through the system." On the other hand, some argue that because of low number of patents going into litigation, increasing quality of patents at patent prosecution stage increases overall legal costs associated with patents, and that current USPTO policy is a reasonable compromise between full trial on examination stage on one hand, and pure registration without examination, on the other hand.

Enforcement of patents – especially patents perceived as being overly broad – by patent trolls, has brought criticism of the patent system, though some commentators suggest that patent trolls are not bad for the patent system at all but instead realign market participant incentives, make patents more liquid, and clear the patent market.

Some have raised ethical objections specifically with respect to pharmaceutical patents and the high prices for medication that they enable their proprietors to charge, which poor people in the developed world, and developing world, cannot afford. Critics also question the rationale that exclusive patent rights and the resulting high prices are required for pharmaceutical companies to recoup the large investments needed for research and development. One study concluded that marketing expenditures for new drugs often doubled the amount that was allocated for research and development. Other critics claim that patents reward and abet misplaced pharmaceutical R&D priorities, which they describe as being directed to creating incremental improved treatments for diseases prevalent in wealthy countries and away from diseases that cause devastation in the developing world.

In response to these criticisms, one review concluded that less than 5 percent of medicines on the World Health Organization's list of essential drugs are under patent. Also, the pharmaceutical industry has contributed US$2 billion for healthcare in developing countries, providing HIV/AIDS drugs at lower cost or even free of charge in certain countries, and has used differential pricing and parallel imports to provide medication to the poor. Other groups are investigating how social inclusion and equitable distribution of research and development findings can be obtained within the existing intellectual property framework, although these efforts have received less exposure.

Some public campaigns for improving access to medicines and genetically modified food have expressed a concern for "preventing the over-reach" of IP protection including patent protection, and "to retain a public balance in property rights". Some economists and scientists and law professors have raised concerns that patents retard technical progress and innovation. Others claim that patents have had no effect on research, based on surveys of scientists.

According to James Bessen, the costs of patent litigation exceed their investment value in all industries except chemistry and pharmaceuticals. For example, in the software industry, litigation costs are twice the investment value.

Proposed alternatives to the patent system

Alternatives have been discussed to address the issue of financial incentivization to replace patents. Mostly, they are related to some form of direct or indirect government funding. One example is the idea of providing "prize money" (from a "prize fund" sponsored by the government) as a substitute for the lost profits associated with abstaining from the monopoly given by a patent. Another approach is to remove the issue of financing development from the private sphere altogether, and to cover the costs with direct government funding.

See also

• Glossary of patent law terms
• List of patent-related topics
• List of people associated with patent law

References

External links

• Directory of Intellectual Property Offices, maintained by World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
• Useful links, maintained by the European Patent Office
• OECD Patent statistics
• Henderson, David R. (2002). "Patents". Concise Encyclopedia of Economics (1st ed.). Library of Economics and Liberty.  OCLC 317650570, 50016270 and 163149563

UpToDate Contents

全文を閲覧するには購読必要です。 To read the full text you will need to subscribe.

• 1. 動脈管開存症のマネージメント management of patent ductus arteriosus
• 2. 早産児における動脈管開存症の病態生理、臨床症状、および診断 pathophysiology clinical manifestations and diagnosis of patent ductus arteriosus in premature infants
• 3. 動脈管開存症の臨床症状および診断 clinical manifestations and diagnosis of patent ductus arteriosus
• 4. 卵円孔開存 patent foramen ovale
• 5. 早産児における動脈管開存症のマネージメント management of patent ductus arteriosus in premature infants

English Journal

• Usefulness of intracardiac echocardiography with a mechanical probe for catheter-based interventions: A 10-year prospective registry.

• Rigatelli G1, Dell'Avvocata F, Giordan M, Viceconte N, Osanna RA, Braggion G, Aggio S, Cardaioli P, Chen JP.
• Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU.J Clin Ultrasound.2014 Nov 12;42(9):534-43. doi: 10.1002/jcu.22177. Epub 2014 Jun 4.
• BACKGROUND: The clinical outcome benefit of intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) with a mechanical probe during congenital heart disease interventions has not been fully investigated. We reported the long-term results of a prospective registry of interatrial shunt closure guided by mechanical ICE.MET
• PMID 24898198

• Perfusion index variability in preterm infants treated with two different natural surfactants for respiratory distress syndrome.

• Karadag N, Dilli D, Zenciroglu A, Aydin B, Beken S, Okumus N.
• American journal of perinatology.Am J Perinatol.2014 Nov;31(11):1015-22. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1370344. Epub 2014 Feb 24.
• Objective The objective of this study was to compare the perfusion index (PI) variability in premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) following administration of two different natural surfactant preparations. Study design This was a prospective study on 92 preterm infants with
• PMID 24566756

• Independent predictors of human milk receipt at neonatal intensive care unit discharge.

• Brownell EA1, Lussier MM1, Hagadorn JI1, McGrath JM2, Marinelli KA1, Herson VC1.
• American journal of perinatology.Am J Perinatol.2014 Nov;31(10):891-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1363500. Epub 2013 Dec 17.
• Objective The aim of this study is to construct a predictive model for very low birth weight (VLBW) infants' receipt of mother's own milk within 24 hours before neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) discharge. Study Design Vermont Oxford Network (VON) clinical data were analyzed retrospectively fo
• PMID 24347254

• The Diagnostic Value of One-Step Nucleic acid Amplification (OSNA) for Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Colon Cancer Patients.

• Vogelaar FJ1, Reimers MS, van der Linden RL, van der Linden JC, Smit VT, Lips DJ, van de Velde CJ, Bosscha K.
• Annals of surgical oncology.Ann Surg Oncol.2014 Nov;21(12):3924-30. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3820-5. Epub 2014 Jun 10.
• BACKGROUND: Lymph node status in colon cancer is critical for prognosis estimation and treatment allocation. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) through detection of cytokeratin 19 mRNA levels with routine pathological examination (R
• PMID 24912612

Japanese Journal

• 技術論文の国際特許分類体系への自動分類システムにおける機能要素の高度化と最適化

• 鈴木 克典,湯川 高志
• 情報処理学会論文誌 54(1), 414-422, 2013-01-15
• 企業が技術戦略を策定する際,技術動向を調査・視覚化してその方針決定に役立てる.このような調査に有益なツールの1つとして特許マップがあり,多くの場合,この作成には特許文書に付与されている国際特許分類(IPC)コードが利用される.この特許マップに学術論文の情報を追加することができれば,より有益なツールになると考えられるが,現在学術論文はIPCに基づいた分類が成されておらず特定分野の網羅的な調査には大き …
• NAID 110009511465

• 座談会 特許事務所における人材育成 (特集 知財における人材育成)

• 恩田 博宣,石川 泰男,龍華 明裕 [他]
• パテント 66(1), 8-30, 2013-01
• NAID 40019543588

• 知的財産Q&A(No.155)新たな特許分類CPCの概要(後編)

• 知的財産情報検索委員会第4小委員会
• 知財管理 = Intellectual property management 63(1), 133-136, 2013-01
• NAID 40019541541

• 判例と実務シリーズ(No.418)包括クロスライセンス契約における発明対価の算定[知的財産高等裁判所平成24.3.21判決]

• 松本 司
• 知財管理 = Intellectual property management 63(1), 79-89, 2013-01
• NAID 40019540950

Related Links

• Google Patents

詳細の表示を試みましたが、サイトのオーナーによって制限されているため表示できません。

• 月刊「パテント」 | 日本弁理士会

弁理士は、知的財産の創造から活用までをサポートします。 ... 国内外の知的財産権に関するトピックスを発信するため、月刊「パテント」を発行しており、会員ならびに全国の関係機関や団体に送付しています。

• Japan Patent Office

Commencement of the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the JPO and the Industrial Property Office of the Czech Republic (Press Release on the METI Web Site) [Last updated March 11, 2015] JPO Compiled a ...

Related Pictures

---

★リンクテーブル★

リンク元	「patency」「trademark」
拡張検索	「patent medicine」

「patency」

　　[★]

• n.

• 明白。開放、開放性。(音声)声道の開放度。(医)開存性、開通性(便通などがあること)

関

patent

　

「trademark」

　　[★]

• 登録商標

関

patent、TM

　 　 　

「patent medicine」

　　[★]

特許医薬品

関

non-prescription drug、nonprescription drug、OTC drug、over-the-counter drug