The Patent Laws.

Progress, Volume II, Issue 8, 1 June 1907, Page 283

The Patent Laws.

Mr. Millar reminded a deputation the other day of his determination to proceed with his Bill for the amendment of the Patent Act. We take the opportunity of reminding him in his turn of some of the anomalies of the Act's working to which we referred in detail in our issues of February and March last. These are, firstly, that applicants and objectors are handicapped by the regulation against the reception of declarations in the Registrar's Court, a regulation contrary to English practice : secondly, the refusal of the complete application in the local branches of the Court which receive the preliminaries : thirdly, the lack of provision for securing technical competence in the Patent Agents of the State : fourthly the continuance of the antiqated practice of requiring the Goverrors' signature to the Letters Patent. The first two of these anomalies can be removed by amending the regulations, but the amendment of the other two requires an amendment of the law. In this matter there is a good guide in the Bill now before the House of Commons in charge of Mr. L,loyd George, the energetic President of the Board of Trade. One provision of that measure especially deserves the attention of Mr. Millar, who aims at the same object as Mr. L,loyd George, viz., securing the adequate working of patents in the country of their issue. Under the new Bill, any applicant can appeal to the Controller three years after the granting of a patent on the ground that it has not been adequately worked in the United Kingdom. In dealing

with Mr. Millars similar proposal — which extends the limit to four years — we pointed out that there may be here valid reasons for the non-working of certain patents, reasons which do not apply to the greatly more developed industries of older countries. With a reservation for meeting such cases, Mr. Millar could not do better than adopt the principle of the Bill now before the House of Commons. That would meet all claims of local industry, and would provide also for such cases as are aimed at by the other measure. It has been found that foreign patentees frequently make their specifications vague enough to cover subsequent inventions, and that there is a practice under which those obtaining the privilege of using a patent have to sign a sort of lease for twenty years, debarring them from using airy other — a practice which experience has shown to be a serious hardship, amounting in some cases to absolute paralysis of trade. The compulsory working clause is aimed at these cases, and our Bill may do the same with justice and advantage to local industry. In that case the measure would, while securing the just rights 1 of patentees, prevent the restraint of progress.