A company called SnappyScreen advertised that its machine was "the World's First Touchless Sunscreen Application System." This company is now being sued by a competitor, Sunscreen Mist Holdings, for false advertising and for patent infringement. Sunscreen Mist is claiming that they had sold and promoted similar products at least as early as 2006.
More information on this case can be found here:
http://www.adlawaccess.com/2017/03/articles/how-not-to-get-burned-by-first-claims/#page=1
If your company is going to make a claim that it is the first to offer a certain type of good or service, the authors of the above-linked article recommend executing a patent search to substantiate it.
This is usually a good idea. However, please also recognize that it will not immunize you from parties bringing such lawsuits: While search agencies have extensive access to a large collection of searchable databases, for reasons already detailed in a prior post, even if a search does not yield any damning prior art references, you will never be able to achieve 100% certainty of this. It may therefore be smarter to avoid making the "first" claim altogether (perhaps instead state "one of the first"). That should take care of the false advertising claim (assuming it is true).
A patent search (or more specifically, a "freedom-to-operate" search) while not providing you with a 100% guarantee, will in many cases turn up the relevant prior art. In the worst case, it can at least help you defeat a "willful infringement" claim from a plaintiff seeking treble (i.e. triple) damages.
More information on this case can be found here:
http://www.adlawaccess.com/2017/03/articles/how-not-to-get-burned-by-first-claims/#page=1
If your company is going to make a claim that it is the first to offer a certain type of good or service, the authors of the above-linked article recommend executing a patent search to substantiate it.
This is usually a good idea. However, please also recognize that it will not immunize you from parties bringing such lawsuits: While search agencies have extensive access to a large collection of searchable databases, for reasons already detailed in a prior post, even if a search does not yield any damning prior art references, you will never be able to achieve 100% certainty of this. It may therefore be smarter to avoid making the "first" claim altogether (perhaps instead state "one of the first"). That should take care of the false advertising claim (assuming it is true).
A patent search (or more specifically, a "freedom-to-operate" search) while not providing you with a 100% guarantee, will in many cases turn up the relevant prior art. In the worst case, it can at least help you defeat a "willful infringement" claim from a plaintiff seeking treble (i.e. triple) damages.
RSS Feed
