>>I am not a lawyer I'm not either, but I have common sense, wihich largely compensates ;-)
I was refering to the Patent Act of Canada, art. 65: "Abuse of rights under patents" See http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/P-4/89936.html#section-65 See also: http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/patents/pat_gd_protect-e.html#section13 � Abuse of patent rights Compulsory licences may be granted to remedy what is called "abuse of patent rights." Such abuse can be considered only three years after grant. Hindering trade and industry is considered as an abuse. Abuse situations include: not meeting demand in Canada; hindering trade or industry in Canada by refusing to grant a licence (if such a licence is in the public interest), or by attaching unreasonable conditions to such a licence; using a process patent to unfairly prejudice production of a non-patented product, or allowing the patent on such a product to unfairly prejudice its manufacture, use or sale. � I've found many other countries having similar provisions in their Patent Law. Aparently, in the United States it is not specified in the Law, but it is widely accepted in practice and jurisprudence: � Although in the United States the patent law does not provide for compulsory licenses, this is probably the country with the richest experience in the granting of compulsory licenses to remedy anti-competitive practices. More than one hundred such licenses have been granted (Scherer, 1999). Compulsory licenses have been granted in the United States in relation to present and future patents � ( http://www.netamericas.net/Researchpapers/Documents/Ccorrea/Ccorrea3.doc ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
