they would have had if they had been applied for or granted without the benefit of priority." Since the Convention forbids calculation of the term of a patent from the foreign filing date, it prevents measurement of the term from the effective filing date when foreign priority is claimed. Thus a foreign applicant who can claim a foreign priority date would receive a longer period of protection than an applicant who filed a domestic application on such date. Of course, a corresponding advantage is accorded U.S. inventors filing abroad. Movement toward a universal patent system (Recommendation No. XXXV) would be promoted if an entire international family of related patents expired at the same time. This requires a common measuring point for the patent term. The effective (foreign or domestic) filing date, unlike the earliest domestic filing date, would constitute such a common measuring point. XXXV The Commission believes that the ultimate To this end the Commission specifically recom- There are great differences today among the patent systems of the various countries. The inventor who desires worldwide or even multi-national patent protection for his discovery must file a multitude of applications, each governed by a separate and distinct system of laws, rules, regulations and procedures. Even after the patent has been obtained, the inventor is confronted with diverse systems of maintaining patent protection. These factors increase the cost of securing multi-national patent protection and often cloud the status of an invention in a particular country, thus discouraging foreign investment and marketing. If change is to be achieved, nations must adopt a single set of long-range goals to guide their intermediate and shortrange movements. Any attempt by revolutionary change, to scrap present systems in favor of new ones, in the United States or abroad, is neither feasible nor desirable. It is, however, both possible and advantageous to promote and direct interim steps toward the ultimate goal-a universal patent. To the extent that harmonization of U.S. practice with prevailing foreign practice can be attained without injury to the quality of the U.S. patent system, such harmonization should be introduced as a first step toward the desired goal. This consideration applies both to the substantive law and to the forms and procedures for implementing it. Other recommendations in this report are responsive to this general objective. Where, however, U.S. practice appears to be the superior one, it is recommended that appropriate Federal agencies make efforts to secure harmonization compatible with U.S. practice. As an intermediate step toward attainment of a universal patent, the formation of regional patent system groupings should be encouraged. Within such groupings there will inevitably develop a mutual respect for the search and judgment capabilities of the members. This should lead to cooperative searching and, beyond that, to mutually recognized patents among the members of the group. The avoidance of the duplication of effort, expense and delay is a clearly attainable benefit from such a development. Finally, as an adjunct to achieving the ultimate goal of a universal patent, the Commission envisages the establishment of a universal network of mechanized information storage and retrieval systems involving all of the patents and other technical literature of the world. CHARTS Charts 1 through 5 illustrate a number of recommended changes by providing a graphic representation of procedural steps and effects arising therefrom. Much of the wording used is abbreviated and should be read in the context of the specific recommendation referred to by number. The flow of events proceeds from top to bottom. Broad arrows pointing into the system indicate conditions affecting the system's flow, while broad arrows pointing outward from the system, signify results emanating from the system's flow. |