CALL US NOW ON 01494 422626
Our client manufactured tiles which were made of glass and painted on the back. These tiles are used for kitchen splashbacks, where the paint effect on the uneven glass surface created a very pretty effect. To their surprise, the client received a letter before action from a patent holder whose patent claimed a “tile-sized sheet of glass with pigment applied to one side”.
Thinking through the validity of the patent, it struck us that the definition “tile-sized sheet of glass with pigment applied to one side” is so broad that it also covers the elements that make up a stained glass window.
So we looked for early published disclosures of stained glass windows. We found a book from the 1960s, which was useful, but then we located one published in the mid-1600s which sought to set out the history of stained glass windows. In the book was a quote from an even earlier book, published by a German monk in the year 1254, which explained in detail exactly how to make stained glass windows.
The 13th-century monk talked of taking a palm-sized piece of glass – i.e. a “tile-sized sheet of glass” and how to mix a rudimentary pigment from natural materials which you could heat in a fire and apply it to the glass – i.e. “pigment applied to one side”.
Having ascertained that stained glass windows had been documented more than 700 years before the patent holder had applied for their patent, we wrote to their attorney and shared this finding with them.
The patent holder decided – wisely - not to take any further action and to let sleeping dogs lie.
Interestingly this is not quite the oldest IP defence that we have used in a case, as we had one that dated back to the Domesday Book in 1086!
This case study demonstrates Michael’s ability to think outside the box and research something in a different way.
It also shows that the way a patent is worded is important, since the description of this patented item inspired him to think more widely than just the tile industry when establishing a defence.
