tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post7097521541083341096..comments2023-10-24T14:45:41.342+02:00Comments on K’s Law: T 520/08 – Quick Inspectionorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07992102028406713066noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-91295600795493797102010-07-09T13:43:16.570+02:002010-07-09T13:43:16.570+02:00Oliver, one thing that apparently neither the boar...Oliver, one thing that apparently neither the board nor the parties mentioned is that it is the European Patent Bulletin which informs the public of the existence of the application and the possibility of its inspection (R. 143 EPC; R. 92 EPC 1973). One isn't obliged to first refer to the A publication pamphlet, it is enough to consult the bulletin (does anyone actually ever read it?). Think of German Gebrauchsmuster where the "Tag der Bekanntmachung" can be earlier that the actual pamphlet publication. Even though "U" documents were not part of the state of the art in old German patent law (and many other ones), the definition of prior art became progressively broader even before the creation of the EPC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com