product desinger

The Benefits of an Interdisciplinary Approach

By Ran Kamil and Sharon Godesh, Soroker Agmon Nordman | IP & beyond

Often there comes a time during the development of a new product when a prior-art search reveals that someone obtained a patent for an aspect of the product, and the development process hits the patent wall. In such cases, the developer has numerous options: from abandoning the product altogether; obtaining a license from the patent holder; applying to revoke or cancel the patent; purchasing the patent; to launching the product anyway and risking being sued for patent infringement. The disadvantages of all these options are that they are costly and usually require revealing information regarding the development of the new product prior to its launch.

Going Around the Wall

Another way around such problem is applying a development process known as “designing-around”. This process entails harnessing the inventive thought that brought the developer to hit the patent wall, to find another solution to the same problem. A solution which would be suffciently different in order to avoid falling into the claims of the patent, thereby circumventing that patent. This process is frequently easier said than done.

Not Going Around in Circles

Patent laws do very little to define what difference between a product and the invention claimed within the patent will be enough to avoid infringement. Courts around the world have repeatedly ruled that this is not quantifiable and must be decided on a case-by-case basis, usually after a lengthy and costly trial. Judicial doctrines such as “equivalents” and “variants” have been developed to ascertain whether an allegedly infringing product genuinely employs a different technological solution than the one covered by the patent, or whether the product utilises the essence of the patent protected invention, with changes that are insignificant or merely “cosmetic”. Whereas engineers and developers can easily understand the need to design a product that is built and functions differently from a competitor’s product as they have a reference of what is in existence, it is often insuffcient in order to avoid a patent infringement. This is because patents usually cover more than one embodiment of the invention and as such include more than the description of a specific product. Therefore, in order to successfully design-around a patent, it is recommended to have the design and development teams work together with professionals versed in reading, understanding, and interpreting patents, both technically and legally.

Case Study

In one case, the client’s competitor had a patent-protected product which included two components pushed away from one another by a spring. In an attempt to design the client’s product around that patent, the client’s engineers suggested using some sort of rubber element instead of a spring. Luckily for the client, he had sought clearance (“freedom to operate”) opinion from his legal advisors and upon inspection of the patent itself, it was revealed that while the description of the invention’s embodiment in the patent indeed described utilising a spring, the claims of that patent were phrased to cover any elastic material or substance. Understanding the patent’s claims as well as their limits (e.g., the substance requirement), gave way to a solution of not using any material or substance at all, but instead relying on the repelling force of magnets to push the two components away from one another. That alone would not suffce to avoid the patent claims, as under the doctrine of equivalents, it is not enough to simply substitute one element for another. In that case, the use of magnets had the extra benefit of saving the need for room for a spring or a substance between the two components. Thus, the variation between the client’s product and the competitors patent was more than a mere equivalent.

The Interdisciplinary Approach

The above example illustrates the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to designing-around a patent and the benefit of consulting with legal and patent experts during the design-around process.

Having the patent in question well studied by patent professionals who can “translate” its claims to the engineers and developers, can save a lot of trial and error as well as much more costly infringement litigation.


Ran Kamil

Ran Kamil

GGI member firm
Soroker Agmon Nordman | IP & beyond
Law Firm Services
Tel Aviv, Israel, and Singapore
T: +972 9 950 70 00
E: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
W: sanlaw.legal
Sharon Godesh

Sharon Godesh

GGI member firm
Soroker Agmon Nordman | IP & beyond
Law Firm Services
Tel Aviv, Israel, and Singapore
T: +972 9 950 70 00
E: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
W: sanlaw.legal


Published: GGI Insider, No. 105, January 2020 l Photo: Gorodenkoff - stock.adobe.com

GGI Logo 70x50px

GGI Geneva Group
International AG

Schaffhauserstrasse 550
P.O. Box 286
8052 Zurich
Switzerland

Contact

T: +41 44 2561818
F: +41 44 2561811
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
www.ggi.com