Should the attorney-client privilege be applicable to patent agents?
Author | Affiliation | |
---|---|---|
LT |
Date |
---|
2007 |
This article analyzes the importance of intellectual property and the necessity to protect inventors’ rights to the information, which they reveal to their representatives - patent agents. An essential element of the communications between legal adviser and his/her client (inventor) is the privilege protecting these communications from disclosure. Firstly, the author provides general information about patent system, attorney-client privilege, their origins and development. For the purposes of this analysis article pays much attention towards the definitions of „attorney“, „client“ and „patent law“. The applicability of attorney-client privilege depends on the theory, which is used, and the country, in which it is used. For example, one of the theories says that a patent agent is a conduit between inventor and patent office. The conduit theory relies on a presumption that a legal adviser is just a conduit – he/she receives information from the client and transmits it to the third parties. In circumstances where no confidentiality, objective and subjective expectations exist, the attorney-client privilege cannot be applied. However, some courts in the United States did not rely on conduit theory, but denied attorney-client privilege to patent agents. This opinion can be based on an argument that patent agent cannot render legal services because he/she does not have legal education. There are other reasons why patent agent should not be granted attorney-client protection, such as that patent agent is not the member of the bar. However, in last three decades courts were willing to grant attorney-client privilege to the patent agents.[...].