Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 SEPTEMBER 2017

Intellectual Property Protection For Startups

Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Explore more from Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.

In a world in which innovation and inventions drive progress, it is hard for young and innovative companies to be fast and innovative on the one hand, but at the same time still follow the rules of the "old"...

LuxembourgIntellectual Property
Olivier Lombardo
Olivier Lombardo
Author LinkedIn connections

In a world in which innovation and inventions drive progress, it is hard for young and innovative companies to be fast and innovative on the one hand, but at the same time still follow the rules of the "old" established business world. A few advices can be extremely helpful for startups in order to navigate their business through shallow and treacherous waters and protect the Intellectual Property which they create.

Teaching others how to overcome issues that could potentially harm their business, is just as important as innovation itself. Helping startups to evolve into successful companies pumps new blood in the world's economy and could potentially create numerous jobs and new avenues for progress.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UPC CoA Confirms “gold Standard” For Added Matter In Sibio v Abbott

The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court recently issued a decision examining whether omitting an elastomeric sealing member from a patent claim constitutes added matter, applying the EPO's "gold standard" test while emphasizing the importance of functional and structural relationships between features. The ruling provides crucial insight into how the UPC approaches intermediate generalizations and whether its methodology differs from the notoriously strict EPO practice on added subject-matter.
LuxembourgIntellectual Property
HGF Law
HGF Law
Article

G 1/25: When Must The Description Be Adapted To Amended Claims?

The European Patent Office's Enlarged Board of Appeal has issued a landmark decision in G 1/25 "Hydroponics," addressing a fundamental question that has divided practitioners for years: when patent claims are amended during examination, must the description be adapted to match? The ruling establishes that inconsistencies between claims and descriptions only require correction when they result in non-compliance with the European Patent Convention, not merely for achieving formal consistency.
LuxembourgIntellectual Property
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Article

G 1/25: When Must The Description Be Adapted To Amended Claims?

The European Patent Office's Enlarged Board of Appeal has issued a landmark decision in G 1/25 "Hydroponics," addressing a fundamental question that has divided practitioners for years: when patent claims are amended during examination, must the description be adapted to match? The ruling establishes that inconsistencies between claims and descriptions only require correction when they result in non-compliance with the European Patent Convention, not merely for achieving formal consistency.
LuxembourgIntellectual Property
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.
Dennemeyer & Associates S.A.