This is not considered an update today, but will be updated this afternoon. Here we urgently add some legal background explanations to facilitate readers to understand the plot.

If you are not interested in the law, you can skip this article directly, without wasting time reading it, and it will not affect the plot.

But if you are a book friend who has seen this before February 12, you may need to go back and read Chapters 13, 27, and 29 again. Because of the previous plot, I have also re-adjusted it to prevent ambiguity.

I have also noticed these days that in the previous chapter 13, and yesterday's chapter "Someone really hits the gun" about using patent priority clauses, some book friends had ambiguity. Later, after a closer look, two book friends said something reasonable.

When I wrote it before, I was a little too short of the length, and there was no discussion on the situation, and I didn't explain it clearly. I originally wanted to have less water, but as I wrote it, I forgot it before, leaving a little bug

So I'd better take advantage of the fact that it's still free now. I don't have any money anyway. I'll post a work related to it and analyze the legal design of the plot in the book.

Otherwise, I am also afraid that some book friends will seem difficult to follow-up legal confrontation.

The following is a legal analysis.

——

First, according to the two paragraphs of Article 29 of my country's Patent Law, "foreign priority" and "national priority" are respectively stipulated.

Foreign priority is for those who have applied for it in a foreign country. They will be handled exactly the same within one year. You can enjoy priority by applying according to the PCT treaty. Those who don’t understand this can do not read it, because at present, I have no ambiguity about it for professional book friends, and the plot in the book does not involve it, so I will not expand it.

Just remember that foreign priority is not for the inventor to improve and iterate, but only to solve the problem that "different countries cannot apply at the same time, so you must leave time for the applicant". Just remember this.

Article 29, paragraph 2, aims at "national priority", which is also the key clause involved in the plot in the book.

The priority of the country is actually to improve and iterate the appropriate inventors themselves, that is, what you invented, if you fine-tune it and reapply within a year, you can ask for the original application number to be preferred, but you can only ask for one. It cannot be said that the third application is required to be priority first... That does not exist.

In this book, the ambiguity among book friends should only involve the above sentences, and now I have clarified it.

I won’t go into details anymore, because when it comes to the “Patent Examination Guide”, even the articles are full of articles and there should be no more ambiguity.

Then, the main problem that I had compressed and fuzzy processing in the previous chapters may be that some book friends will misunderstand that "patent priority can be used to make the number of patents within a year." I want to clarify here so as not to make the legal publicity inaccurate and mislead everyone's understanding of the law.

This matter actually needs to be explained in two parts: improving the number of patents is one operation, and requiring patent priority is another operation. These two operations will not be used at the same time. The specific situation depends on which one to use.

This "specific situation" mainly depends on "after the protagonist's first application, before the second and third application, is there anyone trying to disrupt the situation." This is the variable that determines the fork of the strategy.

It is equivalent to when I wrote a "if-else" structure when I wrote the book before, then it would be a little more rigorous.

If no one notices the protagonist's first application and no one adds it, the protagonist can of course not ask for priority and directly treat the second application as an independent patent to apply for it. Do not write the priority request on the application documents.

If this approach can pass, the protagonist can get two patent authorizations, and the quantity can be sold twice (although one of them is no longer valuable, because the commercial value is covered by the latter, it only plays a role in recharging the library, allowing the company that bought it to disclose to the public in the future, "number of patents +1")

If someone has noticed the protagonist's first application and tries to add a squash, if the protagonist's second application does not state the priority before submitting the application documents, then the protagonist's second application is most likely to be rejected because it is "not novel".

Therefore, the protagonist must state the priority when applying. The final result is: the time the Gassai person will lose novelty when the protagonist approves the first and second applications, but the protagonist's first application will also be covered by the protagonist's own second application.

In other words, in the end, the protagonist can only get one patent in terms of quantity, that is, the latest one, the old one is equivalent to "revoked halfway after applying, and covered by the new one."

The National Knowledge Bureau does this and avoids repeated authorizations. Applicants are encouraged to try to optimize more at one time and not squeeze toothpaste.

So, let's summarize:

No one added a fuss - making a fortune in a quiet voice without raising priority, pretending to be brand new to apply - finally getting two patents, which is an ideal situation.

Someone added a squat - had to mention priority - priority was secured, but there was only one patent number. This is another case.

These two situations cannot occur at the same time, so the "domestic priority" clause cannot be used to brush the number of patents even in 2002. It is just a protective clause to "prevent people who squeeze toothpaste from being stuffed".

To put it simply, when I was like Intel and Huang Daoke squeezing toothpaste, if no one saw it, I would just squeeze a little bit, and squeeze a little bit next time, saying that these are two pieces of toothpaste.

But if someone is seen and stared at me when squeezing toothpaste, I can also have a law to protect me and argue that "My two toothpaste is actually a whole, the second paragraph is an organic composition of the first paragraph, and they are all newly squeezed out, and there are absolutely no bacteria."

(The examples are actually not very accurate, but it is also for the sake of easy-to-understand and easy for book friends who do not learn the law to understand. Professional legal book friends should not be serious.)

I didn't discuss the situation at the beginning because I was afraid that the article would be too long and everyone would not be patient to read it. In my mind, I only planned to let the protagonist encounter one of the situations, but I didn't plan to say more about the other situations, after all, it was not used in the book.

Unexpectedly, it was this way of writing "that you can't use something you can't use" that caused controversy. In addition, it may lead to some laypersons' book friends confusing these two situations, thinking that they can "get both".

Then I temporarily adjusted the front and the follow-up outline today, so I simply let the protagonist encounter both situations in the next chapter:

That is, the "chicken soup oil spoon" was tried to stuff it, and the protagonist discovered it during the summer vacation, so he claimed priority for the chicken soup oil spoon, lost the number of patents, but kept the improvement. Of course, he would ask the other party to fight back and make them pay the price.

The "cocktail dropper" was not attempted to be stuffed, and no one else could have thought of such improvement. The protagonist also carefully searched before applying for the second time during the summer vacation and confirmed this point, so he did not ask for priority from the beginning, and he made a fortune in silence as a brand new patent application.

This will also make the situation clear.

Finally, I would like to thank the book friend "Soul Chasing Knife" and others for pointing it out. As expected, some things written by the writer know that they will not be used in the future, but readers don't know that it will be easy to meet the situation after being separated for too long, so please write them carefully.

In the future... the chapters involving lawsuits may be slightly longer. I will try to do this only in the free chapters. After the money is put on the shelves, we will reduce the legal plots, and then the technological plots will be increased.
Chapter completed!