Inventor forced by Mindef to close company over patent right

[RadX]

ok I read that someone posted this aldy. I knew him. He was a hardworking person.

 

 

https://www.sgh.com.sg/about-us/newsroom/news-release/2010/Pages/ThepassingofDrWongYueSie.aspx

[bellboy]

People need to realise that being able to file a patent and being able to enforce the patent is 2 different matters.

 

Case in point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vuestar_Technologies

 

Vuestar patented using "visual images" to link to other web pages.

They sent thousands of website owners legal letters asking them to pay. Me included.

I did not pay of course, and they just kept quiet.

 

If your patent "lacks novelty and/or inventive step", you cannot enforce it.

Whether it fufils the above point, its for the law to decide.

 

[TameDriver]

 

Acquainted with Dr Ting thru colleagues. Affable, humble & hard working.

 

I liken the scenario of this case to that of a powerful overlord who seizes anything he fancies as his own, and if the victim dares to protest, will be harshly dealt with!

[Shadowdad]

 

You are not the first and will not be the last close minded person

who comes up with the excuse "we need all the facts first"

when a lot of the facts are already presented and starring in your face.

 

Dr Ting came in front of camera to give an unedited and long interview

and gave a credible account of what happened (just pay attention to the body language)

including conversations with the law minister and another PAP MP lawyer Edwin Tong.

 

What he said in the long video is already comprehensive and credible.

It's all on camera and can be used against him if he didn't tell the full truth.

Do you mean to tell me you don't understand this significance?

 

Oh, and your tongue in cheek reply of "I checked the video, still one person talking"

only confirms my suspicion you didn't watch the interview before making your comments.

What an intelligent person you are. My comment had nothing to do with what he said but you are very clever to come to conclusion that i don't believe him by reading my message. You are also very intelligent to know the true and from the expression from video without understanding what actually happen . I must admit that this kind of skill only intelligent person like you have. Stupid people like me don't have. Thank to you from pointing out i should know the true from reading the media and looking at video staring at me. And i forgot the obvious why an unrelated person to Dr Ting or have no negative experience with MINDEF keep barking at me for not knowing the true. Sorry for bing such a closed mind person.

[Boringchap]

The article is very one-sided and we have not heard MINDEF's side of the story. Neither have we looked at the legal documents and court documents with regard to this case. It is not wise to jump to conclusions.

 

I don't know much about patents but I don't think it is a fact that MINDEF had infringed the patents of this particular person. Patent legislation and patent protection is a very complex affair.

 

Anyway, I am not here to defend MINDEF so please don't flame me.

 

In my humble opinion, MINDEF should tell the public its side of the story.

Edited January 17, 2015 by Boringchap

[Mustank]

I really want to believe mindef, really

 

Hope mindef can come out with a comprehensive account

[Nolicense]

One is thinking that this is a great "invention", while the other think it is nothing really new (just like any bus or truck can be retrofitted and ruggerized to suit required needs).

 

This is of course, on the surface view; need to investigate further.

 

But, if I am a vet operating a clinic and I have a customized van to ferry injured animals as "animal ambulance", I would be flabbergasted if someone comes along one day to lay claim that he has the "patent" and I need to pay royalties to use my "animal ambulance".

 

I am not siding anyone.

 

 

 

 

actually patent law very difficult. if you can prove that your ambulance invention pre-dates the filer of the patent, then the patent may be rejected.

 

if there is a way for the filer to prove that his "technology" is significantly different than yours and his patent claims are valid, he can still get his patent, but what comes after may be hard to say. he may go after you later on something else.

 

this is why patent is always so ugly with software technologies. how do you patent algorithms? or even aesthetic design?

now even genetics also want to patent by greedy pharmas.. and lots of lawyers also greedy to earn money.

 

such is the world..

[Kb27]

I didn't read everything, but first thought is that Mindef is a big bully.

 

And I tend to think that you can't win any authorities here.

 

They make the rules, they change the rules and they can break the rules.

You can't win.

[Nicfoo]

 

 

 

Like in heng chun malau Lim.... waited at FUP for the troops!

 

and the Oba san moved faster than the troops, by the time objective captured, the van was there asking if you want a drink..LOL

[Silver_blade]

actually patent law very difficult. if you can prove that your ambulance invention pre-dates the filer of the patent, then the patent may be rejected.

 

if there is a way for the filer to prove that his "technology" is significantly different than yours and his patent claims are valid, he can still get his patent, but what comes after may be hard to say. he may go after you later on something else.

 

this is why patent is always so ugly with software technologies. how do you patent algorithms? or even aesthetic design?

now even genetics also want to patent by greedy pharmas.. and lots of lawyers also greedy to earn money.

 

such is the world..

You have made some valid points. To add, often, several patents have to filed for a single product if the inventor wants to cover as many loopholes as possible. In this case, most of us may not have info on how many patents were filed, what are the patented parts, how each is patented, which of the patents were 'stolen' by MINDEF, etc.

....They make the rules, they change the rules and they can break the rules.....

IP law cannot happy, happy change on a case by case basis.

[Kyosho1]

Could someone"s head roll at the patent office cos Dr Ting was granted patent for supposedly having a utility/design idea thats "novel and/or inventive" . There is an expensive fee to be paid for maintaining the patent for 10-20 years. Now that the court has declared his idea not being novel, that"s a shot to the leg at the government agency that's in charge of IP. The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) is a statutory board under the Ministry of Law. Who is the incompetent IP examiner? Could he have granted "weak" patents to other inventors and then collect lots $$ for IPOS?

Edited January 17, 2015 by Kyosho1

[Sosaria]

I don't think the idea is a 'weak' patent... Not just in singapore, but in several other foreign countries, the patent was granted, according to the doc's story.

 

But to me, just a layman, it doesn't seem to be a very novel idea.

[Boringchap]

I don't think the idea is a 'weak' patent... Not just in singapore, but in several other foreign countries, the patent was granted, according to the doc's story.

 

But to me, just a layman, it doesn't seem to be a very novel idea.

 

I went to do some research and ask lawyer friends.

 

Patent protection is very complex. The fact that patent is granted by a certain country doesn't mean patent is valid. In patent fights, they always try to invalidate the patent.

 

Patent invalidation by Court of Law is not uncommon, in many countries.

 

In USA and European countries, the patent regime is very long-standing and advanced. If you search online, you can find many examples of patents granted by the US Patent Office, yet overturned by the Courts. Same situation in Europe.

 

E.g.

 

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news-stories/press-release/two-people-living-hivaids-overturn-aids-drug-patent

 

http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2013/11/u.s.-court-invalidates-patent-down-syndrome-test

 

In this ruling, the German Courts invalidated Apple's 'slide-to-unlock' patent.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/apples-slide-to-unlock-patent.html

 

IMHO, the fact that a patent has been granted in one country, or many countries, does not automatically assume that the patent is valid. You have to wait till it gets challenged in Court!

Could someone"s head roll at the patent office cos Dr Ting was granted patent for supposedly having a utility/design idea thats "novel and/or inventive" . There is an expensive fee to be paid for maintaining the patent for 10-20 years. Now that the court has declared his idea not being novel, that"s a shot to the leg at the government agency that's in charge of IP. The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) is a statutory board under the Ministry of Law. Who is the incompetent IP examiner? Could he have granted "weak" patents to other inventors and then collect lots $$ for IPOS?

 

Bro,

 

You are very cynical. Maybe you want to study patent law and how patents work before making such allegations? Not funny leh, your allegations. If I work for IPOS, I'd be very angry. But I'm just a by-stander, so don't flame me.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Boringchap

[Boringchap]

Since we are on the topic of patents, remember the infamous 'One-Click' patent by Amazon? Like that also can patent?

 

Anyway, a lot to read about.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click

 

Many links in this wiki article. Very fascinating to see the huge patent fight.

 

I have come to one conclusion - you want to play this patent game, you need a lot of financial resources.

[Yewheng]

 

I went to do some research and ask lawyer friends.

 

Patent protection is very complex. The fact that patent is granted by a certain country doesn't mean patent is valid. In patent fights, they always try to invalidate the patent.

 

Patent invalidation by Court of Law is not uncommon, in many countries.

 

In USA and European countries, the patent regime is very long-standing and advanced. If you search online, you can find many examples of patents granted by the US Patent Office, yet overturned by the Courts. Same situation in Europe.

 

E.g.

 

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news-stories/press-release/two-people-living-hivaids-overturn-aids-drug-patent

 

http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2013/11/u.s.-court-invalidates-patent-down-syndrome-test

 

In this ruling, the German Courts invalidated Apple's 'slide-to-unlock' patent.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/apples-slide-to-unlock-patent.html

 

IMHO, the fact that a patent has been granted in one country, or many countries, does not automatically assume that the patent is valid. You have to wait till it gets challenged in Court!

 

 

Bro,

 

You are very cynical. Maybe you want to study patent law and how patents work before making such allegations? Not funny leh, your allegations. If I work for IPOS, I'd be very angry. But I'm just a by-stander, so don't flame me.

Wa lao so complicated, even create own product also so stressed up that patent could be overturned. We living human really live in a very stressful world, everything also need to worry. Sometimes being simple is good, best is not to know so many things and live simple life so much less stressful..

[Kangadrool]

I hazard guess that most patent offices round the world are more "commercialised" or "business-friendly" nowadays compared to 10 years ago due to mounting pressures internally and externally => KPIs.

 

Do agree that idea is nothing really novel/new. It is a good suggestion project for USMS that will give you some rewards, but qualify for "invention" status, I doubt so. That's basis on our layman on the surface observation from the report and picture. The GS table for patients to rest on don't even look "integrated" to the truck that allow one to fully deploy at a press of a button, only perhaps made of quality stainless steel instead of iron legs?

 

Also, need to probe further if it was patent-pending or patent granted. There's a lot of difference I believe. From my knowledge, it takes long time for patent to be granted. So, you see some novelty devices, always put "patent-pending".

 

I don't think the idea is a 'weak' patent... Not just in singapore, but in several other foreign countries, the patent was granted, according to the doc's story.

But to me, just a layman, it doesn't seem to be a very novel idea.

 

[Boringchap]

Wa lao so complicated, even create own product also so stressed up that patent could be overturned. We living human really live in a very stressful world, everything also need to worry. Sometimes being simple is good, best is not to know so many things and live simple life so much less stressful..

 

Yes, humans surely know how to make our lives complicated.

 

But, we cannot deny that patent regime has helped advance humankind knowledge.

 

Think about what a patent is. You are granted monopoly rights for a limited period of time (I think 20 years), in return for FULL DISCLOSURE of your invention at a patent office.

Full Disclosure - that means you need to document everything. You have to tell the whole world your secret!

 

That is how we build knowledge. People know your secret, they will then build on it to invent something better. Over time, science and knowledge will improve.

 

Ok, the above is not my theory. It is what somebody explained to me why a patent regime is very important.

[Boringchap]

I put up this link earlier. I found this article fascinating. Looks like Apple managed to patent their 'unlocking gesture' move on the iPhone and that patent stood for a while until the German Court invalidated it! Well, this article says the decision is appealable, so I don't know the latest. Apple being so cash rich may just appeal and appeal.

 

-------------------------------

 

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/apples-slide-to-unlock-patent.html

Apple's slide-to-unlock patent invalidated in Germany (decision is appealable)

Samsung and Google's Motorola Mobility have just scored a win over a famous Apple user interface patent. The Bundespatentgericht, Germany's Federal Patent Court, ruled that all claims of EP1964022 on "unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image" are invalid as granted, and additionally held that none of the 14 amendments proposed by Apple could salvage the patent.

----------------------