[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: Jozef Halbersztadt <halber@idea.net.pl>
- To: Simo Sorce <simo.sorce@xsec.it>
- Cc: Xavi Drudis Ferran <xdrudis@tinet.org>, PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>, patents@aful.org
- Subject: Re: [Patents] "condition of ..." amendment
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:27:50 +0200
Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 14:09, Jozef Halbersztadt wrote:
There is no simple answer whether washing machine, screen and processor
each of them is not
new, not innovative, together are inventive. But only if their assembly
is inventive than
software (GUI) can be a part of the invention.
Shouldn't this case (washing machine) fall under the obviousness clause?
Such washing machine seem to be the obvious outcome to an engineer.
Combination of known parts is not always obvious.
The combined elements mutually support each other in their effects to
such extent that a new technical result is achiewed. It is irrelevant
whether each individual element is fully or partly known by itself.
JH
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)