Patently obvious?

A recent case involving potato separating machinery brought under the Patents Act 1977 might cause a few headaches for readers of this blog.

A recent case involving potato separating machinery brought under the Patents Act 1977 might cause a few headaches for readers of this blog.

The case -  Grimme Maschinenfabrik GmbH & Co KG v Derek Scott (trading as Scotts Potato Machinery) went to the Court of Appeal. The Court decided that a supplier of goods can be found liable for indirect patent infringement if it supplies goods within the UK knowing that (or it should be obvious that), although the product itself does not infringe, it can be modified or used with other products to infringe a patent.

Suppliers cannot get off the hook by adding notices to the effect that the product must not be used to infringe a patent. The result? Suppliers must ensure that products cannot be used for patent infringement. Period.
This was last published in December 2010

MicroScope+

Content

Find more MicroScope+ content and other member only offers, here.

Read more on Salesforce Management

Start the conversation

Send me notifications when other members comment.

By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Please create a username to comment.

-ADS BY GOOGLE

ComputerWeekly.com

  • CIO Trends #6: Nordics

    In this e-guide, read how the High North and Baltic Sea collaboration is about to undergo a serious and redefining makeover to ...

  • CIO Trends #6: Middle East

    In this e-guide we look at the role of information technology as the Arabian Gulf commits billions of dollars to building more ...

  • CIO Trends #6: Benelux

    In this e-guide, read about the Netherlands' coalition government's four year plan which includes the term 'cyber' no fewer than ...

SearchITChannel

Close