Patent for cab display unit revoked

Mar 11, 2011
IN THE ST NEWSPAPER TODAY
Patent for cab display unit revoked
Device is neither new nor inventive, says High Court
By K.C. Vijayan
A COMPANY that supplies rooftop electronic display units for Comfort cabs had its patent for the product revoked after a judge held that there was nothing new or inventive about it.
Mr Khek Tai Ting, who set up sole proprietorship Soon Heng Digitax in 2000, had registered the patent for the units, which are used to indicate if the taxi is on hire, busy or on call.

He was selling the product based on his patent for the display units, which are linked to a centrally controlled operator as well as to taximeters in the vehicles.
Lawyers said cases leading to the revocation of patents were rare, and revocation will mean there is no longer a monopoly by the patent holder, enabling others to make similar products without being sued for patent infringement.
Patents for new inventions last for 20 years, during which the owner has sole rights to the invention. Industry players say revocation levels the playing field since others can use the same process to make the product at a lower price.
To enable others to do this after 20 years, the owner of the invention must sufficiently disclose in the patent documents how it is made, so that a person skilled in that specific product area will be able to produce it using the method described.
Justice Chan Seng Onn, in a 40-page written judgment released last week, said the patent 'provided insufficient disclosure as it does not provide sufficient instructions' for reproduction.
The judge likened the patent documents to a 'product brochure' and found the inadequate disclosure levels were even supported by Mr Khek's own expert witness, Mr Yeo Sze Wee, a polytechnic lecturer.
The main feature in the invention was the use of a remote control centre to monitor and control cab movements through a communications system.
As sold on the market, it was actually a multicoloured LED taxi rooftop display connected to a mobile data terminal installed in the interior of the taxi, facing the driver.
On the other hand, competitor Dien Ghin Electronics imported a product that the cab driver can operate from within, by pressing buttons to change the messages displayed on the rooftop units. This device is not linked to a remote control centre.
Dien Ghin imported these LED display units for use by Premier, Prime and Smart cabs, leading to the High Court battle with Mr Khek.
Through a team of lawyers led by Mr Ravindran Muthucumaraswamy, Dien Ghin argued that the patent was neither new nor inventive, and sought to have it revoked.
Mr Ravi argued that the product had been anticipated by at least three products abroad - available before Mr Khek got his patent in 2000.
But lawyer John Tan, arguing for Mr Khek, countered that the three products referred to did not qualify, because they did not disclose sufficient details to enable the invention described in Mr Khek's patent.
Justice Chan ruled that some of the documents cited by Mr Ravi did indeed anticipate Mr Khek's invention and, furthermore, provided more details about the product.
He added that the special remote control centre feature in Mr Khek's product was not inventive and 'does not require much imagination', pointing out that it too had been raised in the documents cited from abroad.
'It would have been obvious to him,' said Justice Chan, in ruling that the invention claimed for the patent was neither novel nor inventive.
vijayan@sph.com.sg
Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd.
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_643984.html

===============
At/ related:
STforum:
12Mar2011: Patent for cab display unit revoked