Re: Is patent description copyrighted ?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roger 
Schlafly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> "Bruce Hayden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > Maybe on a one instance basis, but I would suggest that reasonable
> > expectations are based on the cumulative beliefs of all those involved,
>
> Whatever the law is, it is not determined by the collective belief
> of patent attorneys. I doubt that there are many patent attorneys
> who even think that they have copyrights in their applications.
I can't speak for the situation in the United States.  But as a UK 
patent attorney, I most certainly do think, and would maintain in 
appropriate circumstances, that I have copyright in what I write for my 
clients.  For example, if a client took an application that I had 
drafted and sent him for approval, before paying my fees, and filed it 
on his own account, I would seriously consider (although I concede that 
I probably wouldn't in fact elect to make the case more complicated than 
it need be) adding copyright infringement to my case against him.

I don't think that the copyright would vanish if the application was 
regularly filed by me.

> > ...  But what we are talking about in this thread concerns
> > (IMHO) rights that are NOT necessary for accomplishing that purpose.
> > There is no reason for example that someone preparing a patent
> > application cannot write his own version of the spec, instead of
> > copying it from someone else's patent.  All he is really doing is
>
> If you don't have any reason to copy, then don't copy. Yes, there is
> a reason not to redo work that has already been done. It wastes
> time and money, and may even be unethical if you billing your client
> for work that does not need to be done.
I suggest that to copy the description of another, when preparing a 
client's patent application, is a dereliction of the duty to make one's 
own proper and best attempt to describe the client's invention.  An 
attorney should make his own analysis of the invention and describe it 
in the terms that to the best of his own knowledge, skill and ability 
sets it out, enables it, and includes every potentially relevant, and no 
irrelevant, fact about it.  How does the attorney know that the previous 
description was the optimum?  How does he know that it contained no 
errors of fact, and missed no pertinent statement?  Block copying a 
chunk of another attorney's work seems like serious risk-taking to me. 
I'd only ever do it if the previous application that was part copied was 
owned by the same client, and then only after due consideration and 
consultation with that client - and proper enquiry as to the copyright 
position.
--
Paul