[scott_w]

Interesting how "prior art" can require a product to be released in a country to apply.

So, an international company can just see what is developed in another market, copy it and patent it in their own country?

I can understand this being the case in 1912, but we have the world wide web. Surely this concept is out of date?

[molmalo]

As something I read the other day stated (I think it was that Stratfor monograph that was posted here, but I'm not very sure), it looks like the US is using its patent system as a means to protect their global interests against foreign companies/countries.

So, "if it's not here, you can still patent it" is a way to protect their interests, and then use that new patents all over the world.

But as this case proves, maybe that strategy works against smaller adversaries, but the ones with big pockets can still prove it wrong.

> So, an international company can just see what is developed in another market, copy it and patent it in their own country?

Multinational companies are global when things go nice, (moving money around the world, minimizing taxes, and so on), but then they remember their homeland when they can take advantage from that.

[tedunangst]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. You're saying a company can obtain a patent in the US and then use that patent in other jurisdictions?

[molmalo]

Depends on the treaties signed by those countries.