Member Info for inanaco

Counterparts ............ its in RNS

its the way the legal structure is set up and administered ..

its called patent Bias ... this is the one area that is political .. which is what the PCT etc is trying to eliminate by its members signing up

so the patent system is trying to Protect novel ART but lets say a political Court like china wants to have its cake and eat it .. ie it wants to allow chinese to gain patents in foreign jurisdictions but then starts putting road blocks against foreigners getting patents in its jurisdiction which means you could get a patent in Europe but never in China as they want to manufacture your Art in the local market free of costs.

so the point of getting the International Search report and opinion .. is it forms a legal back stop which is very difficult to overturn, not saying it cannot be, but the presumption will be to approve if you can establish "ART" so that examination stage digs in deep as we well know from the moditope patent history

now if you read Scancells RNS they used the word "counterparts"

"""This case is key to the protection of the Company's pipeline of Moditope® vaccines for the treatment of cancer and will provide commercial exclusivity in all major European territories including: Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden and Turkey.  Counterparts to this patent have been filed in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, South Africa and the US.""

Counterparts
a person or thing that corresponds to or has the same function as another person or thing in a different place or situation.

so the legal basis has been established .. how that is reflected at the National level could be subject to change but the function of that change still reflects the principle which is a presumption to Grant ..

Konar none of use are patent lawyers ... and the point being its a process that is established, so how it ends up is replicated 100,000 times over by the sheer number of patents applied for which pass or fail.

the point of all this, you are painting a picture that is in your head which is not based on facts on the ground ....

but again this point hinges on my first post on patents which Bermuda failed to read correctly ... from then on .. Konar and Bermuda had an incorrect image formed of the discussion

so unless folks actually read whats written rather than seek this constant aggressive stance based on there own interpretation which was wrong ... nothing i can do.

this was the Post i made back to keiny ref PR ... note the question at the bottom

SCLPRE: SpFri 11:05
Missing PR ? we have just had the most impressive science update ever .. that is two this year, no amount of PR can compete with that if folks are not understanding the potential scale of the moditope platform then PR on this matter will not help. Scancell only has its science and all the web around the globe that has developed from that. I really am not sure what PR they now can do.

So I ask, what do you suggest and who is your target audience

now you said i am trying to dismiss posters discussing what they want on the BB ... Really what is this then ? my post to Konar

SCLPRE: KonarFri 11:23
You already can its called email...

But again what data are you missing ?

so what question do you need answering that is not price sensitive ?

No point at all in creating this Channel if you have no idea of the question

C7 i did agree with Bermuda ... which was the essence of what i had been saying ... but again if you are not following whats written, and debating with yourself which is what Bermuda is doing .. nothing i can do to stop that.

SCLPRE: InanacoFri 15:13
bermuda

and thank you for agreeing with me ... i have been saying this all day that the IS report is what establishes prior ART

""""Anyway, to answer your question the ISR has huge value. A search for prior art is carried out in Chinese, English, German and Japanese, plus other languages where necessary. . It saves each individual patent office from having to do that and gives a standardised high quality search report to all offices. On top of that the examiner will give his/her opinion on the patentability of the invention. If the opinion is not good then the applicant might well decide to withdraw the application. So it saves all concerned time, effort and resources and is of enormous benefit."""

now going back to what Max posted

""""Your are all better than that let’s stay focused on the important stuff and raise the bar.
The alternative is to join the other BB. """""

who has been trying to do this ... by moving the topics off moaning .. ????

who identified the gem of BioNtech possible second collaboration ?

the point being scancell science is the juggernaut and so much effort for no gain is devoted by this BB to Scancell not telling you things of minor consequence or folks demands of more PR

yet when i throw the questions back at those making the moans ...... they have nothing to offer ? read the history

But you still do not accept that you did not read the post correctly .. and still try to pass the buck back to me .. with "give it a rest"

Its quite easy ... to explain

Bermuda posted this on Friday

""""I'm really not sure what point you're making about the patent. You seem to be suggesting that the PCT means that if one patent office grants a patent then if automatically follows that the others must."""

. and then suggested what it meant, which he then argued against ....

and this is what i have to deal with, but not one making comments on this 3 posters confusing it further all arguing a point that bermuda has suggested

when it was very clear what i said which is listed below

The international treaty that authorizes the filing of a single patent application to be treated as a patent application in countries around the world is the Patent Cooperation Treaty, most commonly referred to as the PCT. ... """"Patents are granted by individual countries, not by any international authority.26 Dec 2015 """""

""""Patents are granted by individual countries, not by any international authority.26 Dec 2015 """""

its a pity that folks are just not reading what is written, ........ they then go off piste and blame me for arguing LOL

have a good weekend

Jo Johnson didn't just stand on the Conservative Manifesto in 2015 which pledged to hold an in-out referendum and honour the result "whatever the outcome" - he literally wrote it himself

who fancies a bet on a leadership challenge

exactly we have thrashed out the the IS report and comments etc are the most important bit ..

Then ... why do you support "hiding behind protocols" it just makes no sense ??? Bermuda

I am here to give very persuasive arguments to the science fully supported by third party scientists work , and yet i get these endless petty diversions thrown at me mainly because they are miss reading whats written or not understanding it
as i have shown today ... you interrupted my post incorrectly as i have highlighted then all your mates come out to confuse the issue and compound it ..leaving me trying to follow a three way debate from all different angles. every body then gets confused because you deviated from the original post ..

which is why i keep saying the team plays are so bad ...

thanks Ivy ... you have just proved up

Questions were asked at 2015 AGM about funding options DE hid behind protocol hence negative reaction.

you proved my point ... its against the law for them to answer

I know ... after all it is you that suggested i read the patents to give you an Opinion ... ? or have you forgotten that post ?

The issue with asking questions at the AGM from my point of view was about wasting that precious time on questions that cannot be answered ..

it was not about free speech ..

so what does Hiding behind protocols mean ?

Prior art is not irrelevant its the only way the patent can fail .. because the patent applications established "art" which is why the IS report is the most important part ..

inanaco
Posts: 28,063
Opinion: No Opinion
Price: 8.625
RE: most important bitToday 13:15don't you actually follow the thread Ruck ... bermuda was suggesting that the PCT was only just about the application point .. when actually the International search gets a written opinion which is adopted, otherwise you would have 152 written opinions .. and our poor lawyer
would have to translate and reply into chinese or 150 languages and deal with 152 different jurisdictions based on 152 local searches

so we have this set procedure but the ultimate decision is still with the member state but based on the Written opinion and search which is why Scancell only had to deal with one negotiation and questioning

so this is what Bermuda posted

""""""the whole idea of the PCT was purely to simplify the application process so that rather that having to submit different patent applications to each different office, a new standardised international procedure was adopted. However, individual patent offices still have full control over the decision making for their own jurisdiction.""""

bermuda

and thank you for agreeing with me ... i have been saying this all day that the IS report is what establishes prior ART

""""Anyway, to answer your question the ISR has huge value. A search for prior art is carried out in Chinese, English, German and Japanese, plus other languages where necessary. . It saves each individual patent office from having to do that and gives a standardised high quality search report to all offices. On top of that the examiner will give his/her opinion on the patentability of the invention. If the opinion is not good then the applicant might well decide to withdraw the application. So it saves all concerned time, effort and resources and is of enormous benefit."""

moaning

Because the juggernaut of the science .. is been over taken by such minor discussions based around miscommunication of minor events is dominating this BB ..

Bermuda the other day you supported Ivy in asking Scancell to break the law by not "hiding behind protocols"

you then did not have a word to say .. when Ivy suggest that the AGM should contain elements of "anger expression"

so lets not get the holy water out eh !