WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?

Abstract

Significant differences between the patent laws of the industrial nations are discussed. All patent systems have in common the desire to encourage invention, and they all set out to do this by granting a limited monopoly. The monopoly is limited in respect of its scope by the invention and the contribution it makes to the art. It is also limited in terms of time and here comes the first point at which the patent systems diverge. But this is only one thing. The major differences between patent laws concern the nature of inventions which are to be regarded as patentable, the identities of the applicants to whom patents should be granted and the procedures affecting the granting of patents - particularly the procedures. One might perhaps have thought that there would be some consensus of view as to what constitutes an invention. Perhaps to some extent there is, but there is considerable scope for divergence of view as to where the line should be drawn between a patentable invention and one that is not. But this is not the only source of difference because different countries have different ideas as to what inventions should be patented and which should not. These differences in philosophy and procedure are illustrated by references to the British, American, German, Dutch, and Russian concepts and practices. Recent international efforts to reduce the complexity and confusion arising from the differences are reported.