Questões de Inglês
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
Before regulation, British monarchs would use the patent system unfairly, thus favoring some people over others, which led to the increase in the prices of goods.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
In mid-nineteenth century, the British patent system was adjusted in order to be able to face business competition with the expanding American market.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
Up to the end of the nineteenth century, not all patents requested would be granted; they had to be approved by the Crown.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
It is believed that the outstanding performance of the US industry is due to the efficiency of this country"s patent system.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
The basis of a system for protecting intellectual inventions was already stated in the U.S. Constitution.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
Innovation was one of the criteria required by the committee responsible for examining the applications for patents.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
MME - Analista de Licitação
Ano de 2013
Tequila sunset
On September 16th 1 , 2012, at the height of the summer
melt, the Arctic Oceans ice sheet had shrunk to an area of
3.41m square kilometres, half what it was in 1979. And its
volume had shrunk faster still, to a quarter of what it was in
1979, as the sheet is getting thinner as well as smaller. One
culprit is global warming, which is fiercer at the poles than
elsewhere. The worlds average temperature in 2012 was nearly
0.5 °C above the average for 1951-80. In the Arctic, it was up
almost 2 °C.
This sudden warming is like the peeling back of a lid
to reveal a new ocean underneath. That prospect is spreading
alarm (among greens) and excitement ( at the natural resources
and other economic opportunities that could be unveiled ).
Though most of the excitement has been about oil and gas, and
the opening of sea routes between the Atlantic and the Pacific,
some people hope for a fishing bonanza, too, for warmth and
light bring ecological renewal to what is now an icy desert. But
they may be disappointed.
At the moment, the waters around the Arctic account
for a fifth of the worlds catch. There are few fish, however,
under the ice itself. A fishing bonanza would require big
ecological change. A conference organised at the University of
Tromso, in January, looked at how warming will change the
ecology. The consensus was that it wont not because the
Arctic will change too little, but because it will change too
much.
Internet:
The word "for", in "for warmth and light bring ecological renewal to what is now an icy desert" [l.16-17], is used to introduce
a) an unexpected result.
b) a consequence.
c) a reason.
d) a purpose.
e) a contradiction.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
In the American patent system, the idea of protection of individual rights goes against the idea of collective welfare.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
MME - Analista de Licitação
Ano de 2013
Nutrition group petitions for federal
regulation of sugary drinks
A nutrition advocacy group joined with scientists and
health agencies to ask the federal government to decide just how
much sugar is safe in sodas, raising the bar in its crusade to curb
the dangerously high amounts Americans consume.
Drinks are the single largest source of added sugar in the
diet, and the request to the government is one way to fight back
against the ubiquitous marketing and heavy consumption of
sugar-sweetened beverages, the executive director of the Center for
Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), Michael Jacobson, said at a
news conference in Washington.
The average American consumes far more added sugar
than is recommended by the federal government, the World Health
Organization and the American Heart Association. The Dietary
Guidelines for Americans and the Heart Association recommend
that of a 2,000-calorie daily diet, about 32 grams, or about 8
teaspoons, could be added sugars. Surveys have shown the average
consumption at 18 to 23 teaspoons a day.
By sugar, CSPI means sweeteners from cane and beets,
corn, honey, brown rice, malt and other sources of what Jacobson
called nutritionally worthless calories.
At present, sweetened beverages are considered GRAS, or
generally recognized as safe, by the government agencies. Sugar,
Jacobson noted, is not a toxin and is perfectly fine in moderation.
But Americans, on average, eat 78 pounds of added sugar
a year, or 385 calories a day and many scientists have concluded
that is not safe, Jacobson said. One in seven Americans gets at least
a quarter of their calories from added sugar, he said.
Internet:
According to the text,
a) consumers ingest sugar mostly from drinks.
b) sugar lays at the root of obesity among citizens of the United States.
c) the problem associated to sugar consumption would be alleviated if industries invested in alternative means of sweetening drinks.
d) the nutrition advocacy group wants the government to rule over the marketing sugar-sweetened drinks.
e) the government is unwilling to give in to pressure from industries.
A resposta correta é:
Assunto Geral
Banca CESPE
INPI - Tecnologista em Propriedade Industrial
Ano de 2013
An Economic History of Patent Institutions
Scholars such as Max Weber and Douglass North have suggested that intellectual property systems had an important
impact on the course of economic development. However, questions from other eras are still current today, ranging from
whether patents and copyrights constitute ideal policies toward intellectual inventions and their philosophical rationale to the
growing concerns of international political economy. Throughout their history, patent and copyright regimes have confronted
and accommodated technological innovations that were no less significant and contentious for their time than those of the
twenty-first century.
The British Patent System
Britain is noted for the establishment of a patent system which has been in continuous operation for a longer period than
any other in the world. English monarchs frequently used patents to reward favorites with privileges, such as monopolies over
trade that increased the retail prices of commodities. It was not until the seventeenth century that patents were associated
entirely with awards to inventors, when Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies repealed the practice of royal monopoly grants
to all except patentees of inventions.
The British patent system established significant barriers in the form of prohibitively high costs that limited access to
property rights in invention to a privileged few. Patent fees provided an important source of revenues for the Crown and its
employees, and created a class of administrators who had strong incentives to block proposed reforms.
In addition to the monetary costs, complicated administrative procedures that inventors had to follow made transactions
costs also high. Thus nation-wide lobbies of manufacturers and patentees expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the
British patent system. However, it was not until after the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 that their concerns were finally
addressed, in an effort to meet the burgeoning competition from the United States. In 1852 the efforts of numerous societies
and of individual engineers, inventors and manufacturers that had been made over many decades were finally rewarded.
Parliament approved the Patent Law Amendment Act, which authorized the first major adjustment of the system in two
centuries.
However, the adjustments made at that time were not completely satisfactory. One source of dissatisfaction that endured
until the end of the nineteenth century was the state of the common law regarding patents. British patents were granted "by the
grace of the Crown" and therefore were subject to any restrictions that the government cared to impose. According to the
statutes, as a matter of national expediency, patents were to be granted if "they be not contrary to the law, nor mischievous to
the State, by raising prices of commodities at home, or to the hurt of trade, or generally inconvenient." The Crown possessed
the ability to revoke any patents that were deemed inconvenient or contrary to public policy. [...]
The Patent System in the United States
The United States stands out as having established one of the most successful patent systems in the world. American
industrial supremacy has frequently been credited to its favorable treatment of inventors and the inducements held out for
inventive activity. The first Article of the U.S. Constitution included a clause to "promote the Progress of Science and the
useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries." Congress complied by passing a patent statute in April 1790. In 1836 the United States created the first modern
patent institution in the world, a system whose features differed in significant respects from those of other major countries.
The primary feature of the "American system" is that all applications are subject to an examination for conformity with
the laws and for novelty. An examination system was set in place in 1790, when a select committee consisting of the Secretary
of State (Thomas Jefferson), the Attorney General and the Secretary of War scrutinized the applications. These duties proved to
be too time-consuming for highly ranked officials who had other onerous duties, so three years later it was replaced by a
registration system. The validity of patents was left up to the district courts, which had the power to set in motion a process that
could end in the repeal of the patent.
Another important feature of the American patent system is that it was based on the presumption that social welfare
coincided with the individual welfare of inventors. Accordingly, legislators rejected restrictions on the rights of American
inventors.
Nevertheless, economists such as Joseph Schumpeter have linked market concentration and innovation, and patent rights
are often felt to encourage the establishment of monopoly enterprises. Thus, an important aspect of the enforcement of patents
and intellectual property in general depends on competition or antitrust policies. The attitudes of the judiciary towards patent
conflicts are primarily shaped by their interpretation of the monopoly aspect of the patent grant. The American judiciary in the
early nineteenth century did not recognize patents as monopolies, arguing that patentees added to social welfare through
innovations which had never existed before, whereas monopolists secured to themselves rights that already belong to the
public.[...]
B. Zorina Khan. In: Internet:
According to the information provided by text, judge the items below.
Some economists establish a cause and effect relation between patent laws and the constitution of monopolies.
A resposta correta é: