Posted in:
Singapore Firm Claims Link Patent
Just when you thought that the whole craziness of IP couldn’t get any more strange… along comes VueStar Technologies, a Singaporean company that claims a patent on using images to link to a webpage. It seems the company does have Singapore Patent No. 95940 and on that basis is sending bills to firms in Singapore for an annual license of their patent. According to the story in ZDNet Asia, the VueStar has also received a patent in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand. A very quick search for VueStar in the Canadian patent database didn’t get a hit.
It looks like the famous – and lost – case of British Telecom and its claim on hyperlink.
“Possible Patent Infringement in Singapore Patent No.95940”
25.11.2008
On a related note, since Vuestar Technology is the legal owner of the Singapore Patent No. 95940, it has all rights to seek ‘royaly’ and payment in connection with Patent No. 95940.
Under the Patents Act 1994, it isn’t ‘crazy’ the legal owner to start billing everyone who uses Vuestar Technology’s patent in Singapore and possible patent infringement for that matter.
……………………..
Jeong Chun phuoc
Lecturer-in-Law
Jeongphu@yahoo.com
===========================================================
“Patent System & the Economics of Growth”
24.11.2008
Once a valid patent has been issued to the legal owner, the legal owner of that patent may request and demand monetary payment in terms of ‘royalty’ be paid, failing which, legal action may be instituted against the offender under the Patent Law of Singapore.
For critics in the U.S, Australia, New Zealand and Singapore, they could take out legal proceedings to invalidate the patent owned by Vuestar Technology in the respective jurisdiction.
……………………..
Jeong Chun phuoc
Lecturer-in-Law
Jeongphu@yahoo.com
“The Story of Singapore Patent No.95940″
26.11.2008
Since Vuestar Technology is the legal owner of the Singapore Patent No. 95940, it has all rights to seek ‘royaly’ and payment in connection with Patent No. 95940 issued by IPOS, Singapore.
Under the Patents Act 1994, it isn’t ‘crazy’ for the legal owner i.e. Vuestar Technology to start billing everyone who uses its patent in Singapore because any party who refuse to pay ‘royalty’ faces the possibility of patent infringement.
The same scenario can be witnessed in countries where Vuestar Technology has obtained a valid patent i.e. in the U.S, Australia, and New Zealand.
…………………………
Jeong Chun phuoc
Lecturer-in-Law
Jeongphu@yahoo.com
\In sum, the company implied that any Web site that uses pictures and graphics to link to another site or Web page will need a license from Vuestar.\
If that’s what they are saying in their letter, then this does not seem to be borne out by the patent. The patent is directed to web searching, not pure hypertext linking. The claims of the Singapore patent appear to cover web searches whose results display a visual image in addition to a hyperlink to the target.
Most of the independent claims also require the entries of the search results list to display \contact information for an organisation\ as a component. This is defined in the specification as the \organisation’s telephone, e-mail or facsimile contact information\.
So the patent, as far as these claims are concerned, would appear to cover web searches which display visual content and contact information.
Does your website do this?
[Note that Claim 34 does not appear to have this limitation]
This is just a quick analysis of the patent done in 10 minutes. It is not to be construed as legal advice. You should neither act or refrain from acting on the basis of this posting.
Contact your patent attorney for more information, preferably a technically qualified patent attorney.
Disclosure: I am a Singapore patent attorney. I have no connection with any of the parties mentioned in the article. I am acting as an interested member of the public.
“Patent Infringement Proceedings subject to Specifications claimed in the original Patent”
In a way, I agree with the opinion expressed by my learned friend above.
However, a specific position evaluation can only be made after proper examination of the Patent document itself in full with special reference to the substantive specifications/claims as per the Patent.
……………..
Jeong Chun phuoc
Lecturer-in-Law
Jeongphu@yahoo.com