Meet my new best technology: PatSnap™ http://www.patsnap.com/product/
I am adding this wonderful search and analysis tool to my high tech pencil case. My patent searches be more efficient (good for me) and effective (good for everybody). I can also monitor who is citing whom. And whom they are. I have eyes in the back of my head!
And I now have a business partner in London, which is pretty cool and makes me feel all global! Nothing nicer than a call from London in the morning.
On March 31st, the Competition Bureau of Canada published guidelines on the intricate dance of the various Acts governing intellectual property and unfair competition. It is not a bad read at all, as it provides succinct definitions of intellectual property types (which I will no doubt use for inspiration when explaining things to my clients – they are that good), as well as 9 examples of unfair practices in which the Competition Bureau would be called to intervene.
I wanted to share some research on pass rates for the TM and Patent Bar exams in Canada.
It should be noted that one has to qualify to write both the Patent Agent and Trademark Agent qualifying exams, and even accredited lawyers need to go through these exams. I used to whine 😯 about how hard they were, but we’re on the front line and it takes a lot of training to fight for the rights of noble innovators and trademark holders!
(Fair Use, don’t you agree? – apologies to the talented Bill Murray in STRIPES)
and we can feel pretty proud of our skills, and in most cases, persistence, when we pass these exams.
Table 1. Canadian Patent Agent Qualifying Exam passed/wrote in Numbers (sourced from Patent Agent Qualifying Examination Report)
Wrote Paper A
Wrote Paper B
Wrote Paper C
(Respond to Requisition)
Wrote Paper D
Table 2. Canadian Trademark Agent Qualifying Exams Passed/Wrote*
*data kindly provided by CIPOexams as these are not published
It is actually quite a good read, patiently walking the reader through the logic of “Data Acquisition” and “Data Analysis” type claims. Examples are provided, which help me feel the concepts in my pilates-hardened inner core.
Where a physical step is an essential element, the claimed subject-matter should satisfy the fickle Section 2 of the Canadian Patent Act. There is more of a challenge with data analysis, as one needs to ensure that the claims incorporate physical steps and not mere mental processes.
I sat in on the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) webinar yesterday to hear about what would be different when our trade-mark laws and regulations were updated in compliance with all of our Treaties.
The most heart-warming change is that we can now write “trademarks” as one word, and still call ourselves Canadian. I feel emotional just thinking about this. I AM NOT KIDDING! 😀
Less simple, we will (when the changes are brought into law), have an easier time obtaining a filing date for our trademarks. Additionally, for a proposed use mark, there appears to no longer be a requirement for filing evidence of use when the mark is approved! 🙄
One of the attendees asked a good question: will CIPO add more staff to the Oppositions section to accommodate the eventual increase in oppositions (in light of the fact that some of the requirements for establishing a registered trademark are being waived).
They didn’t have an answer ready, but I’m pretty sure I heard a pencil scratching out a note at the CIPO end of the phone line. 😳