MUSE of patent

MUSE of patent

Do you think of patent creative workers! There were no … Do you know the famous, honored patent attorneys? No … Is it a big part in the life of patent, in the form, at the very birth of invention! Yes Yes! In this case, do not you, that the social status, the status of the profession does not correspond to its true value and its role in the process by which the world owes almost everything he has!

The ancients knew the nine muses. In our century, it was added to the tenth, muse of cinema, and recently — the muse of television. But is not it the muse of invention? And what a muse overshadows us, patent? We are many and we are different. One — head of department in a major research institute, the other — the engineer on the invention in a small factory, the third — the expert VNIIGPE. We have different names, faces, positions, but the thing we have in common — with the inventors we create the invention.

Title of patent has not received the recognition it deserves, because it is low and prestige. The blame for this and we, patent. We need to write more about his profession, in fact, have to sing it. The usefulness of the profession of patent tacitly recognized — useless professions, perhaps there are no — and about the most attractive sides of creativity in our profession know little ones

Patent specialists

The patent attorneys are often those who have not found themselves in other engineering professions. Often, they are addicted to a new job, start to create. And sometimes the losers and losers are, but get stuck in the patent engineers (how much you can jump from place to place?) And become dull bureaucrats, suggesting fairly widespread, but wrong opinion about our profession. Prestige patents nourishes itself. She pushes away those who might be talented, outstanding patent specialists.

Outstanding patent engineer …

The unusual phrase, is not it? An outstanding scientist, talented inventor — such words we used to, but a talented patent engineer … The concept of «talent» we associate primarily with the work, but can be a creative work of patent?

Let’s agree what constitutes creativity. It can be determined, for example, search for unconventional solutions which can not be found using only logic or by some rules. Once the works were solving arithmetic examples. When a routine is that we believe the works right now. The scientific and practical development of any problem pushes the boundaries beyond which begins work.

The work of patent is the creative part — drafting claims (as opposed to the mass of writings official papers accompanying the request). Someday the identification and formulation of all the essential features of the invention will become available to any student. So far, even the thorough study of regulations and literature for invention does not guarantee against errors and the most experienced inventors. It would seem that difficult? It is only necessary to describe the invention in detail, and then discard all non-essential characteristics. So in fact more ancient sculptor said: «I take the block of marble and cut off the excess.»

Drafting claims — Art. As in every art form, there are some failures, their successes and their masterpieces, such as the legendary Formula Singer sewing needle. The inventor has created the design of patent and suggested: «Protect!» Can be described in the formula all you could choose something basic, interrelated. But this design into the hands of outstanding patent specialists. «Eye of the needle accomplished by the tip,» — he wrote. A few words — and the whole direction of art is closed to competition. Oddly beysya, no matter how hard you try, all the same formula can not be evaded. It took many years, technology has gone far ahead, but now in the modern electric machine, which sews your wife lives zingerovskaya old formula.

Is not it a masterpiece? And is not the art of the area where you can create such masterpieces? And is not talented, those who creates them? A craftsman can be anywhere.

Why do we hear nothing of talented patent attorneys? Patent attorneys can focus on their applications and become the best inventor, but to become «the best of patent,» it can not, this title is nowhere.

But so easy to adjust the account. Each application need only indicate the name of the members of its patent attorneys. It will be easy to determine how many applications he designed what he (not the organization) rate of return or failures, what percentage of issue. It is necessary to take into account how they changed the formula proposed by the examination of what he has «the percentage of perseverance» — the number of objections. It is possible to take into account how many times a patent engineer won the battle on the Control Council. And it should definitely celebrate the most elegant formula.

Then, patent attorneys will be equal on anyone. Now we compete with ourselves and with the anonymous formulas Bulletin. Knowing the best patent engineers can learn from them. In the meantime, I do not know who to go for science.

I hope this measure will help to at least partially solve another urgent problem — about lzhesoavtorstve. Often, this sin is accused of patent. But put aside the case of manifest bad faith. It is quite a decent person could be in a situation where the inventor is trying to persuade him to become a co-author, realizing that without patent attorneys would not be an application, then there would be no invention. As it is often the patent engineer defines the true scope of the invention, sharpens the wording and makes the idea of ​​all the facets of shine. But this is not part of the actions defined as «creative» participated in making the invention. To substantiate the idea of ​​someone else’s experience or calculations — work, and to formulate it — no. I am sure this is also work, but the work of patent attorneys. And his creative contribution should be recognized.

I want to mention this question is complicated and even delicate. Another inventor bring such a claim, which patent attorneys and do nothing — reprinted, signed, put the press and posted. But it is much more common instances of creative work over the bare idea of ​​patent inventor, sometimes not even knowing that he invented.

I am sure that references to names in the application, and then to impose on the copyright of patent extra responsibility for the fate of the application. Patent attorneys will be more interested in the fact that an application successfully passed the preliminary examination, reefs, storms the main examination and, if necessary, fight on the Control Council. Now, patent engineer hardly responsible for the quality of the application and is not very interested in it. Well compiled application — the laurels of the inventor, bad — it also bumps. I am convinced that the lack of personal interest and responsibility — the important reasons for the low quality of many applications for inventions filed in our country. Judge for yourself: on the one hundred and fifty thousand annually supplied applications copyrights give less than half, therefore, most of the applications, in essence, our, patentovedchesky marriage.

The most effective control of disadvantages — the elimination of the causes of these deficiencies. Let us recognize the right to patent attorneys for creative participation in the creation of the invention (not just as the inventor) and stricter ask him for the quality of their compiled application. The form of the implementation of this responsibility will be competition and transparency of patent, as discussed above. Inventors and patent attorneys will not need to make a deal with his conscience, will improve the quality of applications, they will be better protected by the rights of the inventor and patent specialists.

But there is still a big obstacle in the work of patent. Much blood spoil us

EXPERTS

They do not interfere with the fact that send negative decision. When an expert is wholly opposed to when he breaks the arguments in its decision the applicant’s arguments — that there be angry? Good negative decision has much to teach. For example, in our practice, it was a case where a failure after we understood that our invention is much wider than the stated amount.

Disturbance of patent — sloppiness experts. It manifests itself in how they make their decisions. Rare expert has relied on manual examination or other normative documents as the basis for refusal. Can you imagine that the judge passed sentence, not to mention, of what article of the law, he appoints the punishment? And decide the fate of the present invention without due reference to the law, it turns out you can.

Too often, experts failures motivate such arguments, which are in the regulations, and there can not be. That talk about «ordinary design,» that the «evidence», the claim that «this feature can not be considered significant, since it is necessary for the performance of the proposed device.» Is the formula should contain only the symptoms without affecting its performance?

Or is the situation. In its objection, you clean, with reduction of necessary arguments refuted the point of view of an expert. You get a new failure — exactly the same reasons. Come, let you read your objection to the expert? According to the first paragraph of negative decision seems to read. Judging by the rest — I had never seen. He does not reveal your argument, not denied, it simply ignores them. Arguing with him is like arguing with a tape recorder.

It would seem that the obvious thing — to refer to the decision not only to the cited materials, but also to the regulations, and repeated negative decision to analyze not only the application materials, but also the applicant’s objection, to which the expert answers. Consideration of applications would pass faster and better, there were such a requirement in the regulations governing the conduct of correspondence on request. This document is not, but it is a must. Its absence hinders the normal operation of patent services not less than

Growing Pains

Nobody seems to put forward the slogan «Ingenuity — on an industrial scale» or «invention — the flow.»

However, the fact is the case. The research and design organizations the majority decided on the level of invention. Many research institutes and design protectable subject (ie, a theme which can in principle be carried out at the level of invention) do not take as completed, if it does not use at least one invention.

The number of patent is growing, but still faster growing workload. The patent engineer worked before? He sought protectable solutions where they are created, conducted a patent search to apply, designed and led her on her correspondence.

Who patent engineer is no search for any particular decision, and detailed patent research on all topics, it does not wait for the invention will be set up and organize their creation. For patent attorneys, of course, are drawing up proposals and correspondence on them. In addition, the patent office complements and supports the procedure patent fund their organization.

The volume of work has increased significantly, the number of patent and regulatory service has remained the same: 1-3 percent of the number of engineers. Not everywhere can withstand even the long outdated figure, which also clearly lacks flexibility. After all, the nature of patent work in different organizations is different, and the number of patent should be the same.

For example, the subjects of the works of SRI — livestock, and in another study several areas of agriculture: livestock, agriculture, farming, mechanization of agricultural processes. Number of employees in both SRI can be roughly equal, but in the second patent fund to be much more bulky. The number of patent also serving this fund is included in the same 1-3 per cent, then in the second patent specialists SRI load will fall far more than in the first.

In my opinion, the number of patent workers must be determined by the number of emerging themes (patentable), and the number of working with the Fund — in terms of the fund.

Not everything went smoothly, and with a payment of patent. Specificity of patents is that supervises not only the chief of the patent department. Each patent engineer supervises the work of the patent on the site where it is fixed. In drawing up the proposal he leads the authors in conducting patent research — providing methodological guidance. But if the patent engineer in the organization of one (a very common case), it may receive a salary at the level of «a simple engineer,» although actually directs the patent work throughout the organization and, therefore, serves as the head of the patent department, which is well-known decision Goskomtrud should receive the same salary as the head of the main production department.

All these and many other smaller turmoil reduced the prestige of the profession of patent and hinder business. So let us all get rid of them — patent attorneys, inventors and experts. After all, our common cause — the most important part of the modern development of scientific and technical progress.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: