Insurance needed against insurance patents
11/09/2007
The question of patents for non-technical subject matter is once again hitting the headlines in the USA. Bancorp Services LLC is sueing Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. for infringing a patent for a system that administers and tracks the values of insurance policies in separate accounts (U.S. Patent No. 7,249,037). Bancorp filed suit the same day that the patent issued.
Just three months ago, Bancorp failed to succeed in a similar claim of infringement against MetLife for a related patent (U.S. Patent No. 5,926,792) directed to a system for administering separate account life insurance policies. Bancorp has appealed this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Prior thereto Bancorp had successfully enforced its '792 patent against Hartford Life Insurance Co. with payment of a US$80 million settlement.
Bancorp is now seeking damages from and an interdict against MetLife for infringement of the '037 patent. Apparently, Bancorp believes that its appeal to the Federal Circuit on the related '792 patent case will be successful, and that even if it is not, the result will not impact on its recent '037 patent.
The situation in South Africa is, at present, murky. Although our Patents Act specifies that business methods, as such, are not patentable, there is no case law on the subject. However, because the South African Patent Office does not examine patent applications to determine if they relate to forbidden subject matter or if the relevant invention is "new" and "inventive", a patent will be granted for such subject matter in South Africa if the relevant formalities have been satisfied. Further, even though a patent will be granted, it does not follow that the patent is valid or enforceable. Any other interested party will be able to attack the patent, although the onus will be on this other party to show that the patent is invalid.
The filing of a patent application in South Africa will also establish a priority date, which will reserve the applicant's right to file a corresponding patent application in the USA (and other countries) for 1 year.
| |
Featured Act
Plant breeders' rights Act 15 of 1976
To provide for a system whereunder plant breeders� rights relating to varieties of certain kinds of plants may be granted and registered; for the requirements which have to be complied with for the grant of such rights; for the protection of such rights and the grant of licences in respect of the exercise thereof; and to provide for incidental matters. Download act |
|
Featured Case Law
What is the effect of an incomplete deed of suretyship?
In terms of our law and in particular the General Law Amendment Act No. 50 of 1956 (“the Act”) no contract of suretyship shall be valid unless the terms thereof are embodied in a written document signed by or on behalf of the sureties.
There are 5 essential terms which need to be contained in a contract of suretyship, namely the identity of the creditor, the debtor, the surety and the nature and amount of the principal debt. Failure to complete the essential terms of the suretyship agreement would mean that the contract would be invalid for failure to comply with the statutory formalities. |
|
Related People
Alan Lewis
Partner
Patent Attorney
Tel: +27 (0) 11 646 1507
Email me
|
|
|