Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

UNITED Telephone Company v. Harrison Cox-Walker & Co.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

WALKDEN Aërated Waters Company, in re, 1 Trade Marks, 39.
Walton v. Lavater, 8 C. B. (N. S.) 162

v. Potter, 1 Webs. P. R. 493

Watson v. Holliday, 46 L. T. (N. S.) 878; 48 L. T. (N. S.)

[merged small][ocr errors]

Wegmann v. Corcoran, 13 Ch. D. 65.

Welch v. Knott, 4 K. & J. 747; 4 Jur. (N. S.) 330

Wellington v. Dale, 7 Ex. 888

[ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Wotherspoon v. Currie, 42 L. J. Ch. 130; L. R. 5 H. L. 508

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

128

82, 83,

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors][merged small]

INTRODUCTION.

In this chapter the system of arrangement adopted in the Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks Act, 1883, in the treatment of the subject has been followed:

I. PATENTS.

II. DESIGNS.

III. TRADE MARKS.

Under the head of patents it will be necessary to consider at greater length than perhaps is consistent with an introductory chapter what kind of inventions may be valid subject-matter of letters patent, and what is the consideration for which the privilege is granted to the inventor.

I. PATENTS.
A.

statutes and

of law.

Substantially the law of patents is but little Repeal of changed. The authors of the Act have repealed codification and consolidated into a single enactment the statutes relating to patents, with the exception of the unrepealed portions of the Statute of Monopolies. When this statute (21 James I. Ch. 3) was passed

Simplification of

it was declaratory of the common law, and since then the law of patents has been built up by judicial decisions in interpretation of its provisions. It will thus readily be seen that the codification above referred to relates to procedure and not to the principles of patent law.

A great change is effected by the simplification procedure. of the process for obtaining letters patent. Thus, under the repealed statutes, on an unopposed application with a provisional specification it was necessary for an intending patentee, or his agent, to apply personally at least seven times, and make four separate payments, using four documents for the application; whereas now an applicant, or his agent, need only call at, or send by post to, the Patent Office twice-first, with the declaration and provisional specification, and afterwards with the complete specification. If the complete specification is lodged with the application, all the requirements can be complied with at one visit, or in one delivery if sent by post.

Payments. The payments are also considerably reduced.

A

provisional protection for nine months can now be obtained for the small sum of one pound; and for three pounds more the specification, is completed, and a patent granted on which no further payment is required for four years. The cost of obtaining a patent under the repealed Acts was £25, and the protection, unless further payments were made,

« PreviousContinue »