Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
File:Zambia Independence Act 1964 (UKPGA 1964-65).pdf. Add languages. Page contents not supported in other languages. ... Printable version; Page information ...
This file is licensed under the United Kingdom Open Government Licence v3.0.: You are free to: copy, publish, distribute and transmit the Information; adapt the Information; ...
A patent applicant may include a copyright notice or mask work notice, but only if it also includes the following authorization, expressly permitting the reproduction of the patent: [9] A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to (copyright or mask work) protection.
Patent Act and Patents Act (with their variations) are stock short titles used in Canada, India, Malaysia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States for legislation relating to patents. A Patent Act is a country's legislation that controls the use of patents , such as the Patentgesetz in Germany .
Patentable, statutory or patent-eligible subject matter is subject matter of an invention that is considered appropriate for patent protection in a given jurisdiction. The laws and practices of many countries stipulate that certain types of inventions should be denied patent protection.
A patent attorney is an attorney who has the specialized qualifications necessary for representing clients in obtaining patents and acting in all matters and procedures relating to patent law and practice, such as filing patent applications and oppositions to granted patents.
K. Kashweka (2008). "Archival legislation and the management of public records in Sub-Saharan Africa: the case of the National Archives Act of Zambia". Zambia Library Association Journal. 23. ISSN 0049-853X. C Hamooya, B Njobvu (2010). "Digitization of archival materials: The case of national archives of Zambia". ESARBICA Journal. 29.
Otherwise, the applicant can be accused of double patenting later, and have her patents revoked. [35] The problem of using two different standards for obviousness-type double patenting (i.e."independent and distinct" at the USPTO and "patentably distinct" in the courts) was mostly rectified by the Safe Harbor provision of the Patent Act of 1952.