KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Ticaret ve Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2

NESNELERİN İNTERNETİ VE PATENTLER : NESNELERİN İNTERNETİ PATENT SAVAŞLARINA DOĞRU?

INTERNET OF THINGS AND PATENTS: TOWARDS THE IOT PATENT WARS?

Guido NOTO LA DIEGA
Sayfa
47–66
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The (perhaps cold) war seems impending, due to a number of reasons, such as the complexity ofthe supply chain, the several domains in which the IoT is divided and the composite nature of the IoT devices.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Intellectual property is a key, albeit overlooked, issue when it comes to the Internet of Things (IoT).
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:With the IoT patenting activity being over eight times larger than the general worldwide increase in patenting,research on this field appears critical.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The (perhaps cold) war seems impending, due to a number of reasons, such as the complexity ofthe supply chain, the several domains in which the IoT is divided and the composite nature of the IoT devices.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2016 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Intellectual property is a key, albeit overlooked, issue when it comes to the Internet of Things (IoT). It is stillunclear, for instance, to what extent trade secrets can be used to prevent the user from controlling their own device(the so-called right to hack) and to hinder interoperability. Likewise, it is still to be fully explored to what extentintellectual property (database rights) can be used to prevent data portability. This paper focuses on patent law and,namely, on computer-implemented inventions by giving account of the approaches followed in Europe, United States,and India. With the IoT patenting activity being over eight times larger than the general worldwide increase in patenting,research on this field appears critical. The occasion of this study is the adoption in 2016 of the final version ofthe Indian guidelines on the examination of computer-related inventions, which have been surprisingly overlooked inthe legal literature. The main idea is that the Internet of Things will lead to a dramatic increase of applications for softwarepatents and if examiners, courts, and legislators will not be careful, there is the concrete risk of a surreptitiousgeneralised grant of patents for computer programs as such (in Europe) and for abstract ideas (in the United States).The clarity provided by the Indian guidelines, following a lively public debate, can constitute good practices that Europe,the United States, as well as the Republic of Turkey, should take into account.With the increase of IoT patents,it is foreseeable the shift from the smartphone wars to the IoT wars, as evidenced by some recent litigation betweenFitbit and Jawbone. The (perhaps cold) war seems impending, due to a number of reasons, such as the complexity ofthe supply chain, the several domains in which the IoT is divided and the composite nature of the IoT devices.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DIEGA, G. N. L. (2022). NESNELERİN İNTERNETİ VE PATENTLER : NESNELERİN İNTERNETİ PATENT SAVAŞLARINA DOĞRU?. Ticaret ve Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku Dergisi, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2, 47–66. https://ajindex.com/articles/598151

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (4)

  1. Aggarwal, V. (2015).India’s first Internet of Things policy to focus on Zero Defect, Zero Effect. The Economic Times India. Retrieved from articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-04-10/ news/61017670_1_iot-m-sips-draft-policy. Amundson, S. (2016). United States: Patent Disputes Over Wearables May Herald BroaderPatent Litigation Regarding The Internet Of Things. Mondaq Business Briefing (4 April). Beardwood, J., andBowman, M. (2016). The internet of things and privacy: when do privacy laws apply? Comps. & Law, 26(Jun/Jul), 37-40.
  2. CEN and CENELEC (2016).
  3. Standard Essential Patents and Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) Commitments (CEN-CENELEC). Chathurvedula, S. (2015). Revised guidelines for software patents put on hold. Live Mint. Retrieved at www.livemint.com/Industry/XGBbgNllmvuEUhJWs2cWgK/Revised-guidelines-for-software-patents-put-on-hold.html. Christie, A.F., Dent, C. &Liddicoat, J. (2016). The Examination Effect: A Comparison of the Outcome of Patent Examination in the US, Europe and Australia, J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L., 16, 21. Comments and recommendations on the Guidelines for Examination of Computer-Related Inventions (CRIs) (2015). Retrieved at www.knowledgecommons.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ Comments-Recommendations-on-CRI-Guidelines-2015.pdf. Concerns over the “Guidelines for Examination of Computer Related Inventions (CRIs)” (2015). Retrieved at sflc.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Letter_CRIGuidelines2015-Prime-Minister.pdf. Consumers International (2016). Connection and Protection in the Digital Age. The Internet of Things and challenges for consumer protection. April 2016. Retrieved at http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/1657273/connection-and-protection-the-internet-of-things-and-challenges-for-consumer-protection.pdf
  4. Crouch, D. (2016). First Amendment Finally Reaches Patent Law. Retrieved at http://patentlyo. com/patent/2016/10/amendment-finally-reaches. html. Davis, R. (2016). The Top Patent Cases of 2016: Midyear Report. Retrieved at http://www.law360. com/articles/812729/the-top-patent-cases-of-2016- midyear-report. Elvidge, J., Morrison,J., and Bijman, M. (2016). The IoT: A Look at the IP Landscape of Fitness Wearables. IP Watchdog (24 August). European Patent Office. (2016). Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office, November 2016. Retrieved from http://www.epo.org/ law-practice/legal-texts/html/guidelines/e/index. htm. European Patent Office. (2013). Patents for software? European law