Is the Patents Bill Good for India?

Patent is one, that is needed for each and every country. Its helps to increase motivation of the people by giving the benefits for what they have patented. He can be recognized and if he is interested, then he can sell the patent to others and can earn profit for a particular period of time.

No one other than he cannot produce the same product and market it.

I think for a developing country like India, it is essential for encouraging and motivating other talent.

If anyone innovate any thing he/she must get the benefit for that he also feel motivated for that and he also try to innovate further new things which ultimately helps in India development so we must encourage that person for their development.

I too think bill in necessary for India. Person work hard to invent something, he should get reward of it's invention. If day after invention other uses his idea, inventor would definitely think why he did hard-work as other getting its benefit. This will discourage feeling of inventing something which is definitely good for India.

It is good for India because India is a developing country. It increase the awareness, motivate to the country. Country know about produt and product value with new feature. Other country know about those country through patent. It increase the profit and open many opportunities for country. It is depend on R&D.

India is land of many rare plant and animal species which are endemic to Indian soil. Not only this we Indians hve many traditional knowledge's in our old vedas and puranas. Either it may be the medicinal use of TULSI or turmeric, plastic surgery of great shushurata or recent basmti rice issue. If we don't have patent then our traditional knowledge will be used by some foreign MNCs to their profit without asking its real owner. SO patent is must to conserve and maintain our endemic resources from its commercial use.

First of all we have to know with what patent bill deals with, this bill makes mandatory to patent all new innovation generated by public funded research. Scientist themselves are not happy over this bill. This will involve a huge amount of paperwork and moreover this bill is not in the interest of the public, if public research is sold to company that price thier product very high then people will end up paying double amount. There is also concern that large amount of exchequer will be lost because patenting in itself is very costly process.

I think most of the time the inventor don't have capability in terms of finance or business knowledge even though his invention is fabulous and can prove a boon for society so patent and involvement of mnc will help the invention in reaching the masses.

India is known for 'Jugaad' & brilliant mind which leads to development of new thing (we call it invention). So patent will prove good for India and Indian people. To control its disadvantage proper monitoring is required.

With major changes set to come about under proposed new patent laws, getting advice early in the development of any new product or process is a good idea.

Patent attorneys Rachelle Beale and Margaret Doucas explain some of the key changes and what they will mean.

The long awaited legislation to replace the New Zealand Patents Act 1953 has finally been introduced into Parliament and will be considered by a select committee.

The Patents Bill 2008, introduced in July, makes significant changes to the longstanding Act, most notably for the engineering industry, imposing stricter requirements for the grant of a patent.

Though many of the changes will be welcomed by applicants and patentees for bringing New Zealand's patent law into line with that of most other countries.

Inventions will undergo much stricter scrutiny when it comes to granting of a patent. The current requirement of giving the "benefit of the doubt" to an applicant claiming an invention is patentable, will be replaced with the tougher test of satisfying the Commissioner that on the "balance of probabilities" an invention is patentable.

Further, absolute novelty will be required, meaning that novelty will be destroyed by written or oral description or use anywhere in the world, rather than just the current local (New Zealand) novelty requirement.

The Bill also sets much stricter limits on exactly what can be claimed to be an 'invention'. The Commissioner of Patents will be able to refuse a patent application on the ground that it does not involve an 'inventive step'. In other words, the patent will be refused if it is 'obvious' to a person skilled in the art. Currently, 'obviousness' is not a criteria for consideration by the Commissioner, but is a ground upon which interested parties can oppose the grant of a patent or apply to revoke a granted patent.

A patent application will also be examined for usefulness, with an invention needing to have a specific, credible, and substantial use to receive a grant. This criteria is similar to that required in other countries including the United States "utility" and Europe's "industrial application" requirements.

For those wanting to oppose the granting of patents, the right to seek a hearing with both parties before the Commissioner will no longer exist. Instead, a re-examination by the Commissioner can be sought - without a hearing - before or after grant. Again, the grounds would be lack of 'novelty' or of an 'inventive step'. However, it will still be possible to file an application to revoke a granted patent.

With the extra power the Commissioner of Patents will have to refuse patent applications, it is possible that applications that would be granted under the present Patents Act 1953 won't make it under the new Bill. However, the Bill does provide for appeals to the court over the Commissioner's decisions.

In general the task of construing and interpreting patent claims, and assessing novelty and inventiveness, is not always straightforward. In many cases, different results have been obtained from different tribunals and courts - at the expense of the applicant.

So, considering the substantial changes that will come about as a result of the Bill, it is advisable to seek advice early in the development of any new product or process.

The Bill will go through the normal legislative processes, including opportunities for oral and written submissions, over the next few months. The Select Committee will then recommend changes to be debated in Parliament. The Bill will not become law until after it has been passed by Parliament, which is not likely to occur until 2009 due to the upcoming General Election.

Friends we know the meaning of patent. So no need of describing it, but what it's required is that we should be aware very well about it's application. In the healthcare field it is mandatory to me, due to the present scenario we have.

On the other hand in the field of academy it does not require any more, but it would be more beneficial if government takes some important and tough decisions to improve it.

So friends we need to see our country as a developed one, not like developing anymore, keeping that in mind "PATENT BILL NEEDS AND HAVE TO BE DONE".

According to me patent bill is good for India. In India there is no recognition for inventions. So of the persons are considering them as projects and doing business. This may leads to lack of integrity.