Top 10 – FIC 2017
NEWS PROVIDED BY
FIC 2017
March 2013
Related Links
https://freemindtronic.com/fic-2017-awards
Top 10 – FIC 2017
NEWS PROVIDED BY
FIC 2017
March 2013
Related Links
https://freemindtronic.com/fic-2017-awards
(no official English version) Law 26/2014, No. 67 – Year 26 – 26.11.2014 Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra Download the original PDF document of Law 26/2014 click here Bills 5 June 2014 No. 44/2014 catala version by clicking here Consult the original version in Catalan click here French law March 13, 2015 Double taxation agreement France Andorra clicking here Others statement: BOPA 4737] Article 20: Obliged to pay the fee The person obliged to pay the fee is the national natural or legal person, who requests one or more of the services constituting the generating events. The fees paid must be returned ex officio to whoever is obliged to pay them if the service is not provided for reasons attributable to the Official Bulletin Service of the Principality of Andorra. The fees for the publication of an extraordinary issue and the insertion of an unofficial advertisement are as follows: a) Publication of an extraordinary €100 issue b) Publication of an unofficial announcement €50 The General Budget Law can update the rates in the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra. The files that make up each digital edition and the paper copies of the issues of the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra referred to in article 16.2 will be delivered to the National Archives of Andorra from the date determined by agreement of Government published in the Official Bulletin of the Principality of Andorra. The Official Gazette Service of the Principality of Andorra decides the structure of the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra until the structure of the digital edition is determined by regulation, in accordance with the provisions of article 2.4. The provisions of a normative nature of equal or lower rank to that of this Law that oppose or contradict it, and in particular the Law of the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra, of May 19, 1983, remain repealed. The Government is empowered to issue the provisions necessary for the deployment, effectiveness and execution of this Law within six months from the day after the date of its publication in the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra . Casa de la Vall, October 30, 2014 We the co-princes sanction and promulgate it and order its publication in the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra. François Hollande Joan Enric Vives Sicily Given that the General Council in its session on October 30, 2014 approved the following: law 26/2014, of October 30, on patents It is a recognized fact that the knowledge economy is one of the important drivers of developed societies, and that it is constantly evolving. In the current context of the expansion of innovative activities, it is important and necessary for the Principality of Andorra to promote productive activities that, in order to sustain themselves in sectors such as research, development and innovation, provide high added value and they have a positive impact on the competitiveness of our country. It is also necessary to promote innovation and technological development, taking into account the challenges and opportunities that this evolution poses, facilitating access to knowledge and its dissemination, particularly with regard to inventive activities. In this sense, the patent is an ideal tool to promote the birth and consolidation of these activities, and regulates the conditions for the circulation of ideas and technologies between countries, as a determining factor for the efficient operation of the systems of innovation Advances in the state of the art, without ignoring that on rare occasions they are the result of one-off genius, respond in the vast majority of cases to systematic research work, deployed over the years, which only in limited cases fulfills the objectives sought. The patent is a legal instrument that gives its holder an exclusive right to exploit their invention, materially rewards their enormous creative effort and contributes to the profitability of the capital invested in this inventive process. The countries that have opted more decisively for the protection and harmonization of industrial property are the ones that today have more competitive innovative industries, a fact that shows the [BOPA 4738] correlation that exists between the protection of research and creation , on the one hand, and the quantitative and qualitative growth of inventions and technology, on the other. The Law aims, first of all, to improve and modernize the Andorran legal system to reach an optimal level in terms of the protection of inventions. The establishment of different and complementary limitations or precautions that govern the most advanced economies in our environment would place the Principality of Andorra in a situation of economic disadvantage which would imply that global investments in the most innovative sectors would be directed towards others states that offer better protection. Secondly, this new law aims to harmonize the regulations on patents with the regulations of the countries around it. Patent law is, without a doubt, one of the most harmonized branches of law in existence, so you can see a surprising similarity between the laws of different states. The harmonization of current legislation is based on the need to provide companies and innovative industries with universally uniform rules, in order to guarantee maximum legal certainty, as well as the reduction of costs to carry out exchange transactions in this very sensitive and necessary matter. In response to this challenge, this Law replaces the Patent Law of June 10, 1999, to fully adapt it to common patent law, Harmonization with European Community law is mostly intended through the adaptation of the Law to the most relevant articles of the regime provided for in Directive 1998/44/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, of July 6, relating to the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, and in Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, of April 29 , relating to the respect of intellectual property rights. In the same way, the Law incorporates the provisions necessary to facilitate the accession of the Principality of Andorra to the most important international treaties in the field of patents. In this sense, the Law incorporates certain provisions whose purpose is to facilitate the conclusion of a European patent validation agreement between the Principality of Andorra and the European Patent Organization. Likewise, the Law incorporates the necessary provisions to facilitate the accession of the Principality of Andorra to the Treaty of cooperation in matters of patents, made in Washington on June 19, 1970 . Finally, the purpose of the Law is to guarantee respect for the two most essential international treaties in the field of industrial property, which are the Paris Union Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, dated March 20, 1883 , already ratified by Principality of Andorra, and the Agreement of the World Trade Organization on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights. The Law grants a property right, for a non-extendable period of twenty years, to inventions that meet the patentability conditions established in its provisions. An invention can be patented if it meets the requirements of novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability. The present patentability conditions, as well as their exceptions, incorporate the specialties that generate biotechnological inventions. The patent gives its inventor the property right that derives from it, without prejudice to the specifics relating to inventions generated in the execution of an employment relationship or in the field of public research. The Law establishes the administrative mechanisms for obtaining a patent. In this sense, it is necessary to address a request to the Patent Office, which grants the patent in accordance with the request, once the relevant examination procedure has been passed. The grant of the patent will result in a registration. The model that the Law opts for is that of mere deposit, so that the patentability requirements – except for the obvious lack of novelty – will not be examined by the Patent Office. This lack of substantive examination does not imply, however, as is the case in the Patent Law of June 10, 1999, that patents are subject to a kind of resolution condition under which, if they are not confirmed in the first ten years, they decay. From the entry into force of this Law, Andorran patents will be understood to be fully valid throughout their validity, given that the system of mere deposit does not allow determining whether the patent meets the indispensable requirements for its validity; in any case, the exercise of the powers derived from the patent must be subject to certain precautions. The request for verification proceedings and precautionary measures, as well as the exercise of actions based on a patent, must be accompanied by a principle of proof according to which the title in question meets the conditions of novelty, The Law does not establish a numerus clausus of means of proof, but in any case European patents and also national patents granted after having passed a substantive examination will have this consideration provided that, in the latter case, they have been granted by a procedure through which the patentability conditions required in this Law have been examined. The effects of the patent are regulated in terms equivalent to those governed in the countries around us, and in accordance with the terms provided by the international treaties in force in the matter. The Law also regulates the aspects of the patent that derive from its status as a property title. Likewise, the Law establishes the actions that can be taken against the infringement of the rights conferred by the patent on its owner. Finally, the last chapter is dedicated to the establishment of the Patent Office fees for the services provided by this administrative body, which must be set by law. Patents protect inventions in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Article 2 National treatment of foreign individuals and legal entities Foreign individuals and legal entities will enjoy, with regard to the protection of inventions in the Principality of Andorra, the advantages that the respective laws currently or in the future grant to their nationals, provided that this treatment is derived from international agreements or of the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity must be proven by the one who invokes it. a) A product that is composed or that contains biological matter; b) A procedure through which biological matter is produced, transformed or used; c) Biological matter isolated from its natural environment or produced through a technical procedure can be the subject of an invention, even if it previously existed in a natural state. a) Discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods; b) Aesthetic creations; c) Plans, principles and methods to carry out intellectual activities, in terms of gambling or in the field of economic activities, as well as computer programs; d) Forms of presenting information They cannot be the subject of a patent: a) Cloning procedures of human beings; b) The procedures for modifying the germinal genetic identity of the human being; c) The use of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes; d) Procedures for modifying the genetic identity of animals that subject them to these sufferings without substantial medical or veterinary utility for people or animals, and the animals resulting from these procedures. An invention is considered to involve an inventive step if, in view of the state of the art, it is not obvious to a person skilled in the art. If the state of the art also includes documents referred to in paragraph 3 of article 5, these documents must not be taken into account when deciding whether there has been an inventive activity. An invention is considered to be capable of industrial application if it can be manufactured or used in any kind of industry, including agriculture. a) An obvious abuse in front of the applicant or his cause; b) Or that the applicant or his agent has exhibited the invention in official or officially recognized exhibitions within the meaning of the Convention relating to international exhibitions, signed in Paris on November 22, 1928 . Chapter two Right to a patent; mention of the inventor A patent application can be submitted by several Applicants together. a) A request for the granting of a patent; b) An identification of the applicant; c) A description of the invention; d) One or more claims; e) All drawings mentioned in the description or claims; f) A summary of the invention. a) A statement for which a patent is requested; b) The information that identifies the depositor; c) A description of the invention, or a reference written in Catalan of a previously filed application. The reference to a previously submitted application must indicate the date of submission and its code, as well as the Office in which it was filed. Likewise, the applicant must provide a certified copy of the previous application within two months from the date of submission of the application. a) If the Patent Office detects that, at the time of receipt of an application, the requirements referred to in paragraph 1 of this article have not been met, it must require the depositor to comply with the requirements of the form established in the Executive Regulations. If the depositor meets the requirement, the date of deposit of the application is the date of receipt of all missing items. If the depositor does not comply with the requirement, the application must be considered as if it had not been submitted. b) [BOPA – 4742] If the application refers to drawings that are not attached to the application, the Patent Office must require the applicant to provide the missing drawings. If the depositor meets the requirement, the date of deposit of the application is the date of receipt of the missing drawings. If the depositor fails to comply, the date of deposit is the date of receipt of the application, and any reference to the drawings shall be deemed deleted. However, when the patent application claims the priority of a previous application, and the first one contains drawings that have not been submitted by the applicant, the filing date indicated in the application will be maintained Article 1 of this article, provided that the applicant complies with the requirements established for these purposes in the Executive Regulations. The claims define the object of the requested protection. They must be clear and concise and must be based on the description. The summary of the invention is for technical information purposes only. It cannot be taken into account for any other purpose, and in particular it cannot be used neither to determine the scope of the protection requested, nor to determine the state of the art for the purposes of what is provided in section 3 of article 5. An application must refer to a single invention or a group of inventions related to each other in such a way that they form a single general inventive concept. a) A state party to the Paris Union Convention, or A member state of the World Trade Organization, an application for an invention patent, a utility model, a utility certificate, or the rights holders thereof, enjoy, to carry out the presentation of an Andorran patent application for the same invention, of a right of priority for a period of twelve months from the date of presentation of the first application. By virtue of the exercise of the right of priority, the date of priority is considered to be the filing date of the patent application for the purpose of Article 5, paragraphs 2 and 3, and Article 9, section 3. a) No application is published if it is withdrawn or finally denied before the technical preparations for publication have been completed. b) In the event that, before the expiry of the aforementioned period of eighteen months, the applicant submits a written request to the Patent Office for his application to be published in the Patent Bulletin, the Office de Patents must publish this request as soon as possible after receiving the request. a) Proceedings regarding a product covered by the patent after this [BOPA 4745] product has been introduced to the market by the patent holder, or with his express consent, in the Principality of Andorra or any other territory specified by Government agreement by virtue of reciprocity criteria; b) Acts carried out privately and with non-commercial purposes; c) Acts carried out for experimental purposes in relation to the object of the patented invention; d) Studies and trials, and the consequent practical requirements, which are necessary to obtain a marketing authorization for a medicine in the Principality of Andorra as well as in the market of any country in the world; e) Acts consisting of the extemporaneous preparation, for individual cases, in a pharmacy or by a doctor or a veterinarian, of a medicine in accordance with a medical prescription, or acts regarding the medicine prepared in this way; f) The use of the patented invention in any space or aerial widget, or foreign land vehicle, that temporarily or accidentally penetrates the airspace or the territory of the Principality of Andorra, provided that the patented invention is used exclusively ment in the construction or operation of space or aerial craft, or land vehicle; g) Acts relating to the biological matter obtained by reproduction or multiplication of a protected biological matter subject to the patent, after this matter has been placed on the market in the territory referred to in letter a of this section by the holder of the patent or with its consent, when the reproduction or multiplication is the necessary result of the use for which the mentioned biological material has been commercialized, and on the condition that the material obtained is not subsequently used for new reproductions or multiplications From the date of its publication, the patent application grants its holder provisional protection consisting of the right to demand compensation, reasonable and appropriate to the circumstances, from any person who, between that date and the of publication of the mention in which the patent has been granted, has carried out a use of the invention that after this period is prohibited by virtue of the patent. This same provisional protection is applicable even before the publication of the application before the person who has been notified of the submission and the contents of this submission. When the object of the patent application is constituted by a procedure relating to a microorganism, provisional protection begins only after the microorganism has been made accessible to the public. The patent application is deemed never to have had these effects if it is withdrawn or ultimately denied. The duration of a patent is twenty years from the date of deposit of the application. a) Continue the procedure related to the request, subrogating in the place of the applicant; b) Submit a new patent application for the same invention, which enjoys the same priority; or c) Request that the request be denied. a) Assign or transmit by succession your part of the patent; b) Urge legal actions in defense of the patent and notify the other owners of the company action, so that they can be added to the action; c) Exploit the invention after notifying the other owners; d) Carry out the necessary acts for the preservation of the application or the patent. Any patent application or granted patent may be expropriated for reasons of public utility or social interest, by way of just compensation. In these cases, the general regime of forced expropriation will apply mutatis mutandis. a) Stopping acts that violate your right; b) Compensation for damages and judgments suffered; c) The seizure of the objects produced or imported in violation of their right and of the means mainly intended for the production or the carrying out of the patented procedure; d) The ownership attribution of the objects or means seized by virtue of what is provided in letter c of this section when possible, in which case the value of the affected goods is imputed to the amount of the compensation of damages. If the aforementioned value exceeds the amount of the compensation granted, the patent holder must compensate the other party for the excess; e) The adoption of the necessary measures to prevent the infringement of the patent from continuing and, in particular, the transformation of the seized objects or means, or their destruction when this is indispensable to prevent the infringement of the patent; f) The publication of the conviction of the patent infringer, at the expense of the convicted person, through advertisements and notifications to the interested parties. This measure is only applicable when the sentence expressly states so. a) Unless a license agreement establishes the contrary, any licensee may require the patent holder to initiate the relevant actions before the judicial authority against third parties that infringe the rights of the patent holder, who must ‘specify the compensation you claim; b) This Aryan licensee, if he demonstrates that the patent holder refused or stopped complying with his request within a period of two months from the date of receipt of said request, may initiate said actions on behalf own, after notifying the patent holder of its intention. The patent holder has the right to participate in the lawsuit; c) If, before the expiration of the term referred to in letter b of this section, the licensee shows that immediate action is necessary to avoid serious damage, he can immediately request the actions provided for in said letter; d) Every Aryan licensee has the right to participate in the lawsuit filed by the patent holder to ensure adequate compensation for any damage suffered by him as a result of the injury, without prejudice to the actions that this Aryan licensee may directly instigate. a) The negative economic consequences, among which are the benefits that the holder would have obtained predictably from the exploitation of the patented invention if the infringer’s competition had not existed and the benefits that the latter would have obtained from the exploitation of the patented invention. In the case of moral damage, compensation is appropriate, even if the existence of economic damage has not been proven; b) The price that the infringer would have had to pay to the patent holder for the granting of a license that would have allowed him to carry out his exploitation in accordance with the law. To set it, particular consideration is given, among other factors, to the economic importance of the patented invention, the duration of the patent at the time the infringement began and the number and class of licenses granted at that time . a) The cessation of any unauthorized use of the patented invention and any intention to use the patented invention; b) Order the establishment of guarantees intended to ensure, where applicable, the compensation of said holder or of the Aryan licensee; c) Order that measures be taken to preserve relevant evidence regarding the alleged violation. a) Agree that the precautionary measures be lifted, a decision subject to the provision of guarantees by the defendant in order to ensure the compensation of the principal for any damage caused as a result of the defendant’s infringing activities; or b) Agree that the precautionary measures remain in force, a decision subject to the provision of guarantees by the principal in order to ensure the compensation of the defendant for any damage suffered if the action is ultimately considered unfounded. This decision can only be made if the claimant shows that the principle of proof is being processed diligently. A patent expires: a) The object of the patent is not patentable according to articles 3 to 7; b) The patent does not disclose the invention in a sufficiently clear and complete manner for it to be carried out by an expert in the field; c) The subject matter of the patent extends beyond the content of the application as filed or, if the patent was granted in a divisional application, the content of the initial application as he introduced himself; d) The holder of the patent is not entitled to it, according to articles 9, 10 or 11. This reason can only be invoked by a person who alleges that he is entitled to the patent. a) The resolutions on infringement of the patent that had acquired the force of res judicata and had been executed prior to the declaration of nullity; b) Contracts concluded before the declaration of nullity, to the extent that they had been executed previously. However, for reasons of fairness and to the extent that the circumstances justify it, it is possible to claim the restitution of sums paid under the contract. From the moment an agreement for the validation of European patents between the Principality of Andorra and the European Patent Organization enters into force, a European patent application and a European patent validated in the Principality of Andorra will produce the effects of a national patent application and a national patent in accordance with the Law, without prejudice to the provisions for the execution of the content of the validation agreement. Any person directly affected by a decision of the Patent Office may file an appeal against the decision, in accordance with the provisions of current legislation. a) Any demand for precautionary measures or practice of preliminary proceedings; b) Any action for infringement or a clarification of non-infringement of a patent or a patent application; c) All actions for the declaration of invalidity of a patent; d) Any action on the right to the patent, on the ownership or transfer of a patent application or a patent, or on a license contract. a) Who has an official university qualification recognized in the Principality of Andorra, has Andorran nationality or permanent and effective residence in the Principality of Andorra, and has completed the course and passed the examination convened by the Patent Office. b) Who is an authorized representative in the Principality of Andorra, has Andorran nationality or permanent and effective residence in the Principality of Andorra, and has completed the course and passed the examination convened by the Patent Office. c) Who has passed the patent agents exam of the European Patent Office ( EQE ) and has Andorran nationality or permanent and effective residence in the Principality of Andorra. The fees that are required for the registration and maintenance of a patent, as well as for any other registration established in the Law, and for any service that the Patent Office may perform, as established in the Implementing Regulations, are fixed by law. With the entry into force of the Law repealing all rules of equal or lower rank that oppose it and, in particular, the Patent Law of June 10, 1999 , as well as article 53 of Law 35/2008, of December 18 , of the Labor Relations Code. The Government is empowered to approve the development rules and agreements or instruments necessary to carry out the validation of European patents [BOPA 4754] in the Principality of Andorra, as well as any eventual accession of the Principality of Andorra to the Cooperation Treaty in matter of patents, done in Washington on June 19, 1970 and the Convention on the grant of European patents, done in Munich on October 5, 1973 . The Government is empowered to approve the necessary regulatory provisions required by the development of the Law. Vicenç Mateu Zamora We the co-princes sanction and promulgate it and order its publication in the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra. Joan Enric Vives Sicily François Hollande Given that the General Council in its session on October 30, 2014 approved the following: law 27/2014, of October 30 , on fees of the Patent Office This Law implements Article 73 of the Patent Law, which establishes that the fees required for the registration and maintenance of a patent, as well as for any other registration established in the Patent Law, and for any other service that the Patent Office may perform, as established in the Regulations for the Implementation of the Patent Law, must be fixed by law. The fees referred to in article 73 of the Patents Law are created, which are governed by this Law and, if applicable, by the regulatory provisions that implement it. The Patent Office is responsible for the management and collection of the fees regulated in this Law. The registration and maintenance of a patent, as well as the other registrations relating to a patent, and the other services carried out by the Patent Office referred to in this Law constitute events generating the fees regulated in this Law. The person obliged to pay the fee is the natural or legal person, national or foreign, who requests one or more registrations or services constituting a generating event. The fees paid must be automatically returned to whoever is obliged to pay if the registration or the service is not provided for reasons attributable to the Patent Office .
of October 30, on patents
Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra 4737 – 4754
First transitional provision
The Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra on paper will continue to be published, with an official character, until the date determined by the Government, by means of an agreement that must be published in the Official Gazette of the Principality of Andorra. This date cannot in any case be later than December 31, 2014.
Vicenç Mateu Zamora
General Trustee
President of the French Republic
Coprincipe of Andorra
Bishop of Urgell
Coprincipe of AndorraLaw 26/2014, of October 30, on patents
Statement of reasons
[BOPA 4739] Chapter one. Form of protection and patentability
Article 1 Protection of inventions
Article 3 Patentability conditions
Article 4 Exceptions to patentability
Article 5 Novelty
Article 6 Inventive activity
Article 7 Industrial applicability
Article 8 Harmless disclosure
Article 9 Right to a patent
Article 10 Inventions by employees and by order
Article 11 Inventions of public and parapublic administration staff and teachers
Article 12 Mention and designation of the inventor
Chapter three The application and the procedure until the concession
Article 13 Multiple applicants
Article 14 Application requirements
Article 15 Date of deposit
Article 16 Description of the invention
Article 17 Claims
Article 18 Summary
Article 19 Unit of invention
Article 20 Division of a request
Article 21 Right of priority
Article 22 Claim of priority
Article 23 Effects of the right of priority
Article 24 Amendment, correction and withdrawal of a request
Article 25 Publication of the patent application and consultation of the files
Article 26 Patent grant publication
Article 27 Formal examination of the application and grant of the patent
Article 28 Principle of proof
Article 29 Documents written in a non-official language
Article 30 Register of Patents
Article 31 Rights conferred by a patent, acts of infringement
Article 32 Indirect infringement
Article 33 Limits of patent rights
Article 34 Special cases
Article 35 Rights of the previous user
Article 36 Provisional protection
Article 37 Duration of the patent
Article 38 Extension of protection and interpretation of claims
Chapter five. Joint ownership and change in ownership of patent application or patent
Article 39 Change in the ownership of the patent application or the patent
Article 40 Judicial transfer of the patent application or the patent
Article 41 Registration of the new patent holder and subsequent exploitation
Article 42 Joint ownership of the patent application or the patent
Article 43 Expropriation of the patent
Article 44 Obligations ancillary to the assignment or license
Chapter Six. Contractual licenses
Article 45 License contract
Article 46 Rights of the Aryan graduate [BOPA 4748]
Article 47 Rights of the licensor
Chapter seven. Actions against the infringement of the rights of the holder of a patent; procedural rules
Article 48 Right to exercise an action; actions; procedural rules
Article 49 Counterclaim or exception to the action for the violation of the rights derived from a patent
Article 50 Compensation for damages
Article 51 Precautionary measures
Article 52 Retention at customs
Article 53 Declaration of non-violation
Chapter eight. Changes in patents, waiver and invalidation
Article 54 Changes in patents
Article 55 Resignation
Article 56 Termination
Article 57 Declaration of Nullity
Article 58 Effects of the declaration of nullity
Chapter nine. Validation of European patents in the Principality of Andorra
Article 59 Effect of validated European patents
Chapter Ten. International applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty
Article 60 Application of the Cooperation Treaty in the Matter of Patents
Article 61 International applications submitted to the Patent Office as receiving office
Article 62 The European Patent Office as a designated or elected office
Article 63 National processing
Article 64 Entry into the national phase
Article 65 Modification of claims, description and drawings before the appointed or elected office
Article 66 The European Patent Office as the responsible administration
Article 67 Re-establishment of rights
Article 68 Resources
Article 69 Jurisdiction
Article 70 Representation before the Patent Office
Article 71 Patent agents
Article 72 Summonses
Article 73 Fees
Derogatory provision
First final disposition. Regulatory deployment
Second final disposition. Regulatory deployment
Third final provision. Trademarks and Patents Office of the Principality of Andorra
Fourth final disposition. Entry into force
Casa de la Vall, October 30, 2014
General Trustee
Bishop of Urgell
Coprincipe of Andorra
President of the French Republic
Coprincipe of AndorraLaw 27/2014, of October 30, on Patent Office fees
Statement of reasons
Article 1 Creation
Article 2 Management
Article 3 Generating fact
Article 4 Obliged to pay the fee
Article 5 Merit and payment
Article 6 Payment of annuities
Article 7 Return of fees
Llei 26/2014, Núm. 67 – Any 26 – 26.11.2014 Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra Projectes de llei 5 de juny del 2014 Núm. 44/2014 clicant aqui Descarrega el document original en PDF de la Llei 26/2014 clicant aquí llei 5 de juny del 2014 Consulta la versió en anglès clicant aquí llei francesa 13 març del 2015 Conveni de doble imposició França Andorra cliquant aquí Altres declaracions: BOPA 4737] Article 20 : Obligat al pagament de la taxa L’obligat al pagament de la taxa és la persona física o jurídica nacional, que sol·licita un o més dels serveis constitutius dels fets generadors. Article 21 : Meritació i pagament Article 22 : Retorn de les taxes Les taxes pagades han de ser retornades d’ofici a qui estigui obligat a pagar les si el servei no es presta per causa imputable al Servei del Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. Les taxes per a la publicació d’un número extraordinari i la inserció d’un anunci no oficial són les següents: a) Publicació d’un número extraordinari 100 € b) Publicació d’un anunci no oficial 50 € La Llei del pressupost general pot actualitzar les taxes del Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. Es lliuraran a l’Arxiu Nacional d’Andorra els fitxers que conformen cada edició digital i els exemplars en paper dels números del Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra a què es refereix l’article 16.2 a partir de la data que es determini per acord de Govern publicat al Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. Disposició transitòria tercera El Servei del Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra decideix l’estructura del Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra fins que l’estructura de l’edició digital sigui determinada per reglament, de conformitat amb el que disposa l’article 2.4. Resten derogades les disposicions de caràcter normatiu de rang igual o inferior al d’aquesta Llei que s’hi oposin o la contradiguin, i en particular la Llei del Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra, de 19 de maig de 1983. Es faculta el Govern per dictar les disposicions necessàries per al desplegament, l’eficàcia i l’execució d’aquesta Llei en un termini de sis mesos des de l’endemà de la data de la seva publicació al Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. Casa de la Vall, 30 d’octubre del 2014 Nosaltres els coprínceps la sancionem i promulguem i n’ordenem la publicació en el Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. François Hollande Joan Enric Vives Sicília Atès que el Consell General en la seva sessió del dia 30 d’octubre del 2014 ha aprovat la següent: llei 26/2014, del 30 d’octubre, de patents És un fet reconegut que l’economia del coneixement és un dels motors importants de les societats desenvolupades, i que està en evolució constant. En el context actual d’extensió de les activitats innovadores, és important i necessari que el Principat d’Andorra potenciï les activitats productives que, per sustentar-se en sectors com la investigació, el desenvolupament i la innovació, aporten un alt valor afegit i incideixen positiva ment sobre la competitivitat del nostre país. Així mateix, cal impulsar la innovació i el desenvolupament tecnològic tenint en compte els reptes i les oportunitats que planteja aquesta evolució, facilitant l’accés al coneixement i la seva difusió, particularment pel que fa a les activitats inventives. En aquest sentit, la patent constitueix una eina idònia per afavorir el naixement i la consolidació d’aquestes activitats, i regula les condicions per a la circulació de les idees i de les tecnologies entre països, com a factor determinant per al funcionament eficient dels sistemes d’innovació. Els avenços en l’estat de la tècnica, sense ignorar que en comptades ocasions són fruit d’una genialitat puntual, responen en la immensa majoria dels casos a una labor sistemàtica d’investigació, desplegada al llarg dels anys, que només en limitats casos acompleix els objectius recercats. La patent constitueix un instrument jurídic que confereix al seu titular un dret exclusiu d’explotació de la seva invenció, recompensa materialment el seu esforç creatiu ingent i contribueix a la rendibilitat del capital invertit en aquest procés inventiu. Els països que han apostat més decididament per la protecció i l’harmonització de la propietat industrial són els que avui tenen unes indústries innovadores més competitives, fet que evidencia la [BOPA 4738] correlació que existeix entre la protecció de la investigació i de la creació, d’una banda, i el creixement quantitatiu i qualitatiu de les invencions i de la tecnologia, de l’altra. La Llei pretén, en primer lloc, millorar i modernitzar l’ordenament jurídic andorrà per assolir un nivell òptim pel que fa a la protecció de les invencions. L’establi ment de limitacions o cauteles diferents i complementàries que regeixen en les economies més avançades del nostre entorn situaria el Principat d’Andorra en una situació de desavantatge econòmic que implicaria que les inversions mundials en els sectors més innovadors s’orientessin cap a altres estats que ofereixen una protecció millor. En segon terme, aquesta nova llei té per objecte harmonitzar la normativa en matèria de patents amb la normativa dels països del seu entorn. El dret de patents és, sens dubte, una de les branques del dret més harmonitzades que existeixen, de manera que es pot constatar una semblança sorprenent entre les legislacions dels diferents estats. L’harmonització de la legislació vigent es fonamenta en la necessitat de dotar les empreses i indústries innovadores d’unes regles universalment uniformes, per tal de garantir la màxima seguretat jurídica, així com la reducció dels costos per dur a terme les transaccions d’intercanvi en aquesta matèria tan sensible i necessària. Per do narres posta a aquest repte, aquesta Llei substitueix la Llei de patents, del 10 de juny de 1999, per adaptar-la plenament al dret comú de patents, i incorpora les regles que regeixen el dret comunitari europeu, com també el de les organitzacions internacionals de les quals el Principat d’Andorra ja forma part o a les quals es pot integrar en el futur. L’harmonització amb el dret comunitari europeu es pretén en la seva majoria mitjançant l’adaptació de la Llei als articles més rellevants del règim previst en la Directiva 1998/44/CE del Parlament Europeu i el Consell, del 6 de juliol, relativa a la protecció jurídica de les invencions biotecnològiques, i en la Directiva 2004/48/CE del Parlament Europeu i el Consell, del 29 d’abril, relativa al respecte dels drets de propietat intel·lectual. De la mateixa manera, la Llei incorpora les previsions necessàries per facilitar l’adhesió del Principat d’Andorra als tractats internacionals més cabdals en matèria de patents. En aquest sen tit, la Llei incorpora determinades previsions que tenen per objecte facilitar la celebració d’un acord de validació de patents europees entre el Principat d’Andorra i l’Organització Europea de Patents. Igualment, la Llei incorpora les disposicions necessàries per facilitar l’adhesió del Principat d’Andorra al Tractat de cooperació en matèria de patents, fet a Washington el 19 de juny de 1970. Finalment, la Llei té per objecte garantir el respecte dels dos tractats internacionals més essencials en matèria de propietat industrial, que són el Conveni de la Unió de París per a la protecció de la propietat industrial, del 20 de març de 1883, ja ratificat pel Principat d’Andorra, i l’Acord de l’Organització Mundial del Comerç sobre els aspectes dels drets de propietat intel·lectual relacionats amb el comerç. La Llei atorga un dret de propietat, durant un termini de vint anys no prorrogables, a les invencions que compleixen les condicions de patentabilitat establertes en les seves disposicions. Es pot patentar una invenció si compleix els requisits de novetat, d’activitat inventiva i d’aplicabilitat industrial. Les presents condicions de patentabilitat, així com les seves excepcions, incorporen les especialitats que generen les invencions biotecnològiques. La patent confereix al seu inventor el dret de propietat que en deriva, sense perjudici de les especificitats relatives a les invencions generades en execució d’una relació laboral o en l’àmbit de la investigació pública. La Llei estableix els mecanismes administratius per a l’obtenció d’una patent. En aquest sentit, cal adreçar una sol·licitud a l’Oficina de Patents, la qual concedeix la patent d’acord amb la sol·licitud, un cop superat el procediment d’examen pertinent. La concessió de la patent donarà lloc a una inscripció registral. El model pel qual opta la Llei és el de mer dipòsit, de manera que els requisits de patentabilitat –llevat de la falta evident de novetat– no seran examinats per l’Oficina de Patents. Aquesta falta d’examen de fons no implica, però, com succeeix en la Llei de patents, del 10 de juny de 1999, que les patents estiguin sotmeses a una mena de condició resolutòria en virtut de la qual, si no són confirmades en els deu primers anys, decauen. A partir de l’entrada en vigor d’aquesta Llei, les patents andorranes s’entendran plenament vàlides durant tota la seva vigència, atès que el sistema de mer dipòsit no permet determinar si la patent compleix els requisits indispensables per a la seva validesa; en tot cas, l’exercici de les facultats deriva des de la patent s’ha de sotmetre a certes cauteles. La sol·licitud de diligències de verificació i mesures cautelars, així com l’exercici d’accions basades en una patent, haurà d’anar acompanyada d’un principi de prova segons el qual el títol en qüestió compleix les condicions de novetat, activitat inventiva i aplicabilitat industrial. La Llei no estableix un numerus clausus de mitjans de prova, però en tot cas tindran aquesta consideració les patents europees i també les patents nacionals concedides després d’haver superat un examen de fons sempre que, en aquest últim cas, hagin estat concedides per un procediment mitjançant el qual s’hagin examinat les condicions de patentabilitat requerides en aquesta Llei. Els efectes de la patent es regulen en termes equivalents als que es regeixen en els països del nostre entorn, i d’acord amb els termes que disposen els tractats internacionals vigents en la matèria. La Llei també regula els aspectes de la patent que deriven de la seva condició de títol de propietat. Igualment, la Llei estableix les accions que es poden emprendre contra la in fracció dels drets que confereix la patent al seu titular. Finalment, el darrer capítol es dedica a l’establiment de les taxes de l’Oficina de Patents en concepte dels serveis efectuats per aquest òrgan administratiu, que s’hauran de fixar per llei. Les patents protegeixen les invencions d’acord amb les disposicions d’aquesta Llei. Article 2 Tracte nacional a persones físiques i jurídiques estrangeres Les persones físiques i jurídiques estrangeres gaudiran, pel que fa a la protecció de les invencions al Principat d’Andorra, dels avantatges que les lleis respectives concedeixin actualment o en el futur als seus nacionals, sempre que aquest tractament es derivi d’acords internacionals o del principi de reciprocitat. La reciprocitat s’ha de provar per aquell que la invoqui. a) Un producte que estigui compost o que contingui matèria biològica; b) Un procediment mitjançant el qual es produeixi, transformi o utilitzi ma tèria biològica; c) La matèria biològica aïllada del seu entorn natural o produïda mitjançant un procediment tècnic pot ser objecte d’una invenció, encara que ja existeixi anteriorment en estat natural. a) Descobriments, teories científiques i mètodes matemàtics; b) Creacions estètiques; c) Plans, principis i mètodes per dur a terme activitats intel·lectuals, en matèria de joc o en l’àmbit de les activitats econòmiques, així com els programes per a ordinadors; d) Formes de presentar informacions No poden ser objecte de patent: a) Els procediments de clonació d’és sers humans; b) Els procediments de modificació de la identitat genètica germinal de l’ésser humà; c) La utilització d’embrions humans amb fins industrials o comercials; d) Els procediments de modificació de la identitat genètica dels animals que els suposin a aquests patiments sense utilitat mèdica o veterinària substancial per a les persones o els animals, i els animals resultants d’aquests procediments. Es considera que una invenció implica una activitat inventiva si, en vista de l’estat de la tècnica, no resulta evident per a una persona experta en la matèria. Si l’estat de la tècnica també inclou documents referits en l’apartat 3 de l’article 5, aquests documents no han de ser tinguts en compte en el moment de decidir si hi ha hagut una activitat inventiva. Es considera que una invenció és susceptible d’aplicació industrial si es pot fabricar o utilitzar en qualsevol mena d’indústria, incloent-hi l’agricultura. a) Un abús evident davant del sol·licitant o el seu causant; b) O que el sol·licitant o el seu causant hagin exhibit la invenció en exposicions oficials o oficialment reconegudes en el sentit del Conveni relatiu a les exposicions internacionals, signat a París el 22 de novembre de 1928. Capítol segon. Dret a una patent; menció de l’inventor Una sol·licitud de patents pot ser presentada per diversos Sol·licitants con juntament. a) Una petició per a la concessió d’una patent; b) Una identificació del sol·licitant; c) Una descripció de la invenció; d) Una o més reivindicacions; e) Tot dibuix esmentat en la descripció o les reivindicacions; f) Un resum de la invenció. a) Una declaració per la qual se sol licita una patent; b) La informació que identifica el dipositant; c) Una descripció de la invenció, o una referència redactada en català d’una sol·licitud prèviament dipositada. La referència a una sol·licitud presenta da anteriorment ha d’indicar la data de presentació i el codi d’aquesta, així com l’Oficina en què va ser dipositada. Així mateix, el sol·licitant haurà d’aportar una còpia certificada de la sol·licitud anterior en el termini de dos mesos a comptar de la data de presentació de la sol·licitud. a) Si l’Oficina de Patents detecta que, en el moment de la recepció d’una sol·licitud , no s’han complert els requisits referits a l’apartat 1 d’aquest article, ha de requerir al dipositant que compleixi els requisits de la forma establerta en el Reglament d’execució. Si el dipositant compleix el requeriment, la data de dipòsit de la sol·licitud és la data de recepció de tots els elements que falten. Si el dipositant no compleix el requeriment, la sol·licitud s’ha de considerar com si no hagués estat presentada. b) [BOPA – 4742] Si la sol·licitud fa referència a dibuixos que no s’adjunten a la sol·licitud, l’Oficina de Patents ha de requerir al dipositant que aporti els dibuixos que hi falten. Si el dipositant compleix el requeriment, la data de dipòsit de la sol·licitud és la data de recepció dels dibuixos que falten. Si el dipositant no compleix el requeriment, la data de dipòsit és la data de recepció de la sol·licitud, i qualsevol referència als dibuixos s’ha de considerar suprimida. No obstant això, quan la sol·licitud de patent reivindiqui la prioritat d’una sol·licitud anterior, i la primera contingui els dibuixos que no s’hagin presentat pel sol·licitant, es mantindrà la data de dipòsit indicada en l’apar tat 1 d’aquest article, sempre que el sol·licitant compleixi amb els requi sits establerts a aquests efectes en el Reglament d’execució. Les reivindicacions defineixen l’objecte de la protecció sol·licitada. Han de ser clares i concises i s’han de fonamentar en la descripció. El resum de la invenció serveix exclusivament per a una finalitat d’informació tècnica. No es pot tenir en compte per a cap altra finalitat, i en particular no es pot utilitzar ni per determinar l’àmbit de la protecció sol·licitada, ni per determinar l’estat de la tècnica als efectes del que disposa l’apartat 3 de l’article 5. Una sol·licitud s’ha de referir a una única invenció o a un grup d’invencions relacionades entre si de tal manera que formin un sol concepte inventiu general. a) Un estat part en el Conveni de la Unió de París, o Un estat membre de l’Organització Mundial del Comerç, una sol·licitud de patent d’invenció, de model d’utilitat, de certificat d’utilitat o els seus drethavents, gaudeix, per efec tuar la presentació d’una sol·licitud de patent andorrana respecte de la mateixa invenció, d’un dret de prioritat durant un termini de dotze mesos a partir de la data de presentació de la primera sol·licitud. En virtut de l’exercici del dret de prioritat, la data de prioritat es considera la data de presentació de la sol·licitud de patent a l’efecte de l’article 5, apartats 2 i 3, i de l’article 9, apartat 3. a) No es publica cap sol·licitud si és retirada o finalment denegada abans que hagin finalitzat els preparatius tècnics per a la publicació. b) En cas que, abans de l’expiració del període esmentat de divuit mesos, el sol·licitant presenti una petició per escrit a l’Oficina de Patents perquè la seva sol·licitud es publiqui en el Butlletí de Patents, l’Oficina de Patents ha de publicar aquesta sol·licitud en el termini més breu possible després de la recepció de la petició. a) Actes respecte d’un producte cobert per la patent després que aquest [BOPA 4745] producte hagi estat introduït al mer cat pel titular de la patent, o amb el seu consentiment exprés, al Principat d’Andorra o a qualsevol altre territori especificat per acord del Govern en virtut de criteris de reciprocitat; b) Actes efectuats en privat i amb fins no comercials; c) Actes efectuats amb fins experimentals en relació amb l’objecte de la invenció patentada; d) Estudis i assaigs, i els consegüents requisits pràctics, que resultin necessaris per a l’obtenció d’una autorització de comercialització d’un medicament al Principat d’Andorra així com al mer cat de qualsevol país del món; e) Actes que consisteixin en la preparació extemporània, per a casos individuals, en una farmàcia o per un metge o un veterinari, d’un medica ment d’acord amb una prescripció mèdica, o actes respecte del medicament preparat d’aquesta manera; f) L’ús de la invenció patentada en qualsevol giny espacial o aeri, o vehicle terrestre, estranger, que temporalment o accidentalment penetri en l’espai aeri o en el territori del Principat d’Andorra, sempre que la invenció patentada sigui utilitzada exclusiva ment en la construcció o el funcionament del giny espacial o aeri, o el vehicle terrestre; g) Actes relatius a la matèria biològica obtinguda per reproducció o multiplicació d’una matèria biològica protegida objecte de la patent, després que aquesta matèria hagi estat posada al mercat en el territori al qual es refereix la lletra a d’aquest apartat pel titular de la patent o amb el seu con sentiment, quan la reproducció o la multiplicació sigui el resultat necessari de la utilització per a la qual hagi estat comercialitzada la matèria biològica esmentada, i a condició que la matèria obtinguda no s’utilitzi posteriorment per a noves reproduccions o multiplicacions. A partir de la data de la seva publicació, la sol·licitud de patent confereix al seu titular una protecció provisional consistent en el dret a exigir una indemnització, raonable i adequada a les circumstàncies, de qualsevol persona que, entre aquella data i la data de publicació de la menció en què la patent ha estat concedida, hagi portat a terme una utilització de la invenció que després d’aquest període estigui prohibida en virtut de la patent. Aquesta mateixa protecció provisional és aplicable fins i tot abans de la publicació de la sol·licitud davant de la persona a qui s’hagi notificat la presentació i el contingut d’aquesta presentació. Quan l’objecte de la sol·licitud de patent estigui constituït per un procediment relatiu a un microorganisme, la protecció provisional comença només des que el microorganisme ha estat fet accessible al públic. Es considera que la sol·licitud de patent mai no ha tingut aquests efectes si és retirada o finalment denegada. La durada d’una patent és de vint anys des de la data de dipòsit de la sol·licitud. a) Continuar el procediment relatiu a la sol·licitud, subrogant-se en el lloc del sol·licitant; b) Presentar una nova sol·licitud de patent per a la mateixa invenció, que gaudeixi de la mateixa prioritat; o c) Demanar que la sol·licitud sigui denegada. a) Cedir o transmetre per successió la seva part de la patent; b) Instar accions legals en defensa de la patent i notificar als altres propietaris l’acció empresa, a fi que aquests es puguin afegir a l’acció; c) Explotar la invenció després de notificar-ho als altres propietaris; d) Efectuar els actes necessaris per a la conservació de la sol·licitud o de la patent. Qualsevol sol·licitud de patent o patent concedida pot ser expropiada per causa d’utilitat pública o d’interès social, mitjançant una indemnització justa. En aquests supòsits, aplicarà mutatis mutandis el règim general de l’expropiació forçosa. a) L’aturada dels actes que violin el seu dret; b) La indemnització dels danys i per judicis soferts; c) L’embargament dels objectes produïts o importats amb violació del seu dret i dels mitjans principalment destinats a la producció o a la realització del procediment patentat; d) L’atribució en propietat dels objectes o mitjans embargats en virtut del que es disposa en la lletra c d’aquest apartat quan sigui possible, en el cas dels quals s’imputa el valor dels béns afectats a l’import de la indemnització de danys i perjudicis. Si el valor esmentat excedeix l’import de la indemnització concedida, el titular de la patent ha de compensar l’altra part per l’excés; e) L’adopció de les mesures necessàries per evitar que prossegueixi la violació de la patent i, en particular, la transformació dels objectes o mitjans embargats, o la seva destrucció quan això sigui indispensable per impedir la violació de la patent; f) La publicació de la sentència condemnatòria de l’infractor de la patent, a costa del condemnat, mitjançant anuncis i notificacions a les persones interessades. Aquesta mesura només és aplicable quan la sentència així ho indiqui expressament. a) Llevat que un contracte de llicència estableixi el contrari, qualsevol llicen ciatari pot requerir del titular de la patent que entauli les accions pertinents davant de l’autoritat judicial contra ter cers que lesionin els drets del titular de la patent, el qual ha d’especificar la compensació que reclama; b) Aquest llicenciat ari, si demostra que el titular de la patent va refusar o va deixar de complir la seva petició dins el termini de dos mesos des de la data de recepció de la dita sol·licitud, pot entaular les dites accions en nom propi, després de notificar la seva intenció al titular de la patent. El titular de la patent té el dret de participar en la demanda; c) Si, abans de l’expiració del termini referit a la lletra b d’aquest apar tat, el llicenciat ari demostra que és necessària una acció immediata per evitar un dany greu, pot instar immediatament les accions previstes en la dita lletra; d) Tot llicenciat ari té el dret de participar en la demanda entaulada pel titular de la patent per assegurar una compensació adequada per qualsevol perjudici sofert per ell com a conseqüència de la lesió, sense perjudici de les accions que aquest llicenciat ari pugui instar directament. a) Les conseqüències econòmiques negatives, entre les quals hi ha els beneficis que el titular hauria obtingut previsiblement de l’explotació de la invenció patentada si no hagués existit la competència de l’infractor i els beneficis que aquest últim hagi obtingut de l’explotació de l’invent patentat. En el cas de dany moral és procedent la indemnització, encara que no s’hagi provat l’existència de perjudici econòmic; b) La quantitat que com a preu l’infractor hauria hagut de pagar al titular de la patent per a la concessió d’una llicència que li hauria permès portar a terme la seva explotació conforme a dret. Per fixar-la es té en compte especialment, entre altres factors, la importància econòmica de l’invent patentat, la durada de la patent en el moment en què va començar la violació i el nombre i la classe de llicències con cedides en aquell moment. a) La cessació de tota utilització no autoritzada de la invenció patentada i de tota intenció d’utilització de la invenció patentada; b) Ordenar la constitució de garanties destinades a assegurar, si escau, la indemnització del dit titular o del llicenciat ari; c) Ordenar que es prenguin mesures per preservar les proves rellevants respecte de la violació al·legada. a) Acordar que s’aixequin les mesures cautelars, decisió subjecta a la provisió de garanties per part del demandat per tal d’assegurar la indemnització del de mandant per qualsevol perjudici que tingui com a conseqüència de les activitats infractores del demandat; o b) Acordar que les mesures cautelars continuïn en vigor, decisió subjecta a la provisió de garanties per part del de mandant per tal d’assegurar la indemnització del demandat per qualsevol perjudici que tingui si l’acció finalment es considera infundada. Aquesta decisió només es pot prendre en cas que el demandant mostri que el principi de prova s’està tramitant diligentment. Una patent s’extingeix: a) L’objecte de la patent no és patentable segons els articles 3 a 7; b) La patent no revela la invenció d’una manera suficientment clara i completa perquè la pugui dur a terme una per sona experta en la matèria; c) L’objecte de la patent s’estén més enllà del contingut de la sol·licitud tal com ha estat presentada o, si la patent va ser concedida en una sol·licitud divisional, del contingut de la sol·licitud inicial tal com es va presentar; d) El titular de la patent no hi té dret, segons els articles 9, 10 o 11. Aquest motiu només pot ser invocat per una persona que al·legui que té dret a la patent. a) Les resolucions sobre violació de la patent que haguessin adquirit força de cosa jutjada i haguessin estat executades amb anterioritat a la declaració de nul·litat; b) Els contractes conclosos abans de la declaració de nul·litat, en la mesura que haguessin estat executats amb anterioritat. No obstant això, per raons d’equitat i en la mesura que les circumstàncies ho justifiquin, és possible reclamar la restitució de sumes pagades en virtut del contracte. A partir del moment en què entri en vigor un acord per a la validació de patents europees entre el Principat d’Andorra i l’Organització Europea de Patents, una sol·licitud de patent europea i una patent europea validada al Principat d’Andorra produiran els efectes d’una sol·licitud de patent nacional i una patent nacional d’acord amb la Llei, sense perjudici de les disposicions per a l’execució del contingut de l’acord de validació. Tota persona directament afectada per una decisió de l’Oficina de Patents pot interposar recurs contra la decisió, d’acord amb el que estableix la legislació vigent. a) Tota demanda de mesures cautelars o de pràctica de diligències preliminars; b) Tota acció per violació o a una de claració de no-violació d’una patent o d’una sol·licitud de patent; c) Tota acció per a la declaració de nul·litat d’una patent; d) Tota acció sobre el dret a la patent, sobre la propietat o el traspàs d’una sol·licitud de patent o d’una patent, o sobre un contracte de llicència. a) Qui disposi d’una titulació universitària oficial i reconeguda al Principat d’Andorra, tingui nacionalitat andorrana o residència permanent i efectiva al Principat d’Andorra, i hagi realitzat el curs i superat l’examen que convoqui l’Oficina de Patents. b) Qui sigui mandatari acreditat al Principat d’Andorra, tingui nacionalitat andorrana o residència permanent i efectiva al Principat d’Andorra, i hagi realitzat el curs i superat l’examen que convoqui l’Oficina de Patents. c) Qui hagi superat l’examen d’agents de patents de l’Oficina Europea de Patents (EQE) i tingui nacionalitat andorrana o residència permanent i efectiva al Principat d’Andorra. Les taxes que es requereixen per al registre i el manteniment d’una patent, com també per a tota altra inscripció establerta en la Llei, i per a tot servei que pugui efectuar l’Oficina de Patents, segons estableixi el Reglament d’execució, es fixen per llei. Amb l’entrada en vigor de la Llei que den derogades totes les normes d’igual o inferior rang que s’hi oposin i, en especial, la Llei de patents, del 10 de juny de 1999, així com l’article 53 de la Llei 35/2008, del 18 de desembre, del Codi de relacions laborals. Es faculta el Govern perquè aprovi les normes de desenvolupament i els acords o instruments necessaris per portar a terme la validació de patents [BOPA 4754] europees al Principat d’Andorra, així com una eventual adhesió del Principat d’Andorra al Tractat de cooperació en matèria de patents, fet a Washington el 19 de juny de 1970 i al Conveni sobre la concessió de patents europees, fet a Munic el 5 d’octubre del 1973. Es faculta el Govern perquè aprovi les disposicions reglamentàries necessàries que exigeixi el desenvolupament de la Llei. Vicenç Mateu Zamora Nosaltres els coprínceps la sancionem i promulguem i n’ordenem la publica ció en el Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. Joan Enric Vives Sicília François Hollande Atès que el Consell General en la seva sessió del dia 30 d’octubre del 2014 ha aprovat la següent: llei 27/2014, del 30 d’octubre, de taxes de l’Oficina de Patents Aquesta Llei desplega l’article 73 de la Llei de patents, que estableix que les ta xes que es requereixen per al registre i el manteniment d’una patent, com també per a tota altra inscripció establerta en la Llei de patents, i per a tot altre servei que pugui efectuar l’Oficina de Patents, segons estableixi el Reglament d’execució de la Llei de Patents, s’han de fixar per llei. Es creen les taxes a les quals fa referència l’article 73 de la Llei de patents, les quals es regeixen per aquesta Llei i, si és el cas, per les disposicions reglamentàries que la despleguin. Correspon a l’Oficina de Patents la gestió i el cobrament de les taxes regulades en aquesta Llei. Constitueixen fets generadors de les taxes regulades en aquesta Llei el registre i el manteniment d’una patent, així com les altres inscripcions relatives a una patent, i els altres serveis duts a terme per l’Oficina de Patents a què es refereix aquesta Llei. L’obligat al pagament de la taxa és la persona física o jurídica, nacional o estrangera, que sol·licita una o més inscripcions o serveis constitutius d’un fet generador. Les taxes pagades han de ser retor nades d’ofici a qui estigui obligat a pa garles si la inscripció o el servei no es presta per causa imputable a l’Oficina de Patents.
del 30 d’octubre, de patents
Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra 4737 – 4754
Projectes de llei 27 d’octubre del 2014 Núm. 82/2014 cliquant aqui
Disposició transitòria primera
El Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra en paper es continuarà publicant, amb caràcter oficial, fins a la data que el Govern determini, mitjançant un acord que s’haurà de publicar al Butlletí Oficial del Principat d’Andorra. Aquesta data no pot ser en cap cas posterior al 31 de desembre del 2014.
Vicenç Mateu Zamora
Síndic General
President de la República Francesa
Copríncep d’Andorra
Bisbe d’Urgell
Copríncep d’AndorraLlei 26/2014, del 30 d’octubre, de patents
Exposició de motius
[BOPA 4739] Capítol primer. Forma de protecció i patentabilitat
Article 1 Protecció d’invencions
Article 3 Condicions de patentabilitat
Article 4 Excepcions de patentabilitat
Article 5 Novetat
Article 6 Activitat inventiva
Article 7 Aplicabilitat industrial
Article 8 Divulgació innòcua
Article 9 Dret a una patent
Article 10 Invencions d’empleats i per encàrrec
Article 11 Invencions del personal de l’Administració pública i parapública i docents
Article 12 Menció i designació de l’inventor
Capítol tercer. La sol·licitud i el procediment fins a la concessió
Article 13 Sol·licitants múltiples
Article 14 Requisits de la sol·licitud
Article 15 Data de dipòsit
Article 16 Descripció de la invenció
Article 17 Reivindicacions
Article 18 Resum
Article 19 Unitat d’invenció
Article 20 Divisió d’una sol·licitud
Article 21 Dret de prioritat
Article 22 Reivindicació de prioritat
Article 23 Efectes del dret de prioritat
Article 24 Esmena, correcció i retirada d’una sol·licitud
Article 25 Publicació de la sol·licitud de patent i consulta dels expedients
Article 26 Publicació de concessió de patent
Article 27 Examen formal de la sol·licitud i concessió de la patent
Article 28 Principi de prova
Article 29 Documents redactats en idioma no oficial
Article 30 Registre de Patents
Article 31 Drets conferits per una patent, actes d’infracció
Article 32 Infracció indirecta
Article 33 Límits dels drets de les patents
Article 34 Supòsits especials
Article 35 Drets de l’usuari anterior
Article 36 Protecció provisional
Article 37 Durada de la patent
Article 38 Extensió de la protecció i interpretació de les reivindicacions
Capítol cinquè. Propietat conjunta i canvi en la propietat de la sol·licitud de patent o de la patent
Article 39 Canvi en la propietat de la sol·licitud de patent o de la patent
Article 40 Traspàs judicial de la sol·licitud de patent o de la patent
Article 41 Inscripció del nou titular de la patent i posterior explotació
Article 42 Propietat conjunta de la sol·licitud de patent o de la patent
Article 43 Expropiació de la patent
Article 44 Obligacions accessòries a la cessió o llicència
Capítol sisè. Llicències contractuals
Article 45 Contracte de llicència
Article 46 Drets del llicenciat ari [BOPA 4748]
Article 47 Drets del llicenciador
Capítol setè. Accions contra la lesió als drets del titular d’una patent; normes processals
Article 48 Dret a exercir una acció; accions; normes processals
Article 49 Reconvenció o excepció davant l’acció per la violació dels drets derivats d’una patent
Article 50 Indemnització per danys i perjudicis
Article 51 Mesures cautelars
Article 52 Retenció a la duana
Article 53 Declaració de no violació
Capítol vuitè. Canvis en patents, renúncia i invalidació
Article 54 Canvis en patents
Article 55 Renúncia
Article 56 Extinció
Article 57 Declaració de Nul·litat
Article 58 Efectes de la declaració de nul·litat
Capítol novè. Validació de patents europees al Principat d’Andorra
Article 59 Efecte de les patents europees validades
Capítol desè. Sol·licituds internacionals segons el Tractat de Cooperació en Matèria de Patents
Article 60 Aplicació del Tractat de Cooperació en Matèria de Patents
Article 61 Sol·licituds internacionals presentades a l’Oficina de Patents com a oficina receptora
Article 62 L’Oficina Europea de Patents com a oficina designada o elegida
Article 63 Tramitació nacional
Article 64 Entrada en la fase nacional
Article 65 Modificació de les reivindicacions, la descripció i els dibuixos davant l’oficina designada o elegida
Article 66 L’Oficina Europea de Patents com a administració encarregada
Article 67 Restabliment de drets
Article 68 Recursos
Article 69 Jurisdicció
Article 70 Representació davant l’Oficina de Patents
Article 71 Agents de patents
Article 72 Citacions
Article 73 Taxes
Disposició derogatòria
Disposició final primera. Desplegament normatiu
Disposició final segona. Desplegament reglamentari
Disposició final tercera. Oficina de Marques i Patents del Principat d’Andorra
Disposició final quarta. Entrada en vigor
Casa de la Vall, 30 d’octubre del 2014
Síndic General
Bisbe d’Urgell
Copríncep d’Andorra
President de la República Francesa
Copríncep d’AndorraLlei 27/2014, del 30 d’octubre, de taxes de l’Oficina de Patents
Exposició de motius
Article 1 Creació
Article 2 Gestió
Article 3 Fet generador
Article 4 Obligat al pagament de la taxa
Article 5 Meritació i pagament
Article 6 Pagament d’anualitats
Article 7 Retorn de les taxes
Anti Mouse Jacking system in video demonstration on a “TROTEE.NET” project.
BEWARE ! The contactless mouse jacking system is a cyber safety and security solution by NFC that allows you to lock and unlock a vehicle without contact.
This video is presented a demonstration developed to measure by Freemindtronic SL. The electric scooters shown in this video are not manufactured or marketed. These are multi-trust contactless access control demonstrators that work via an NFC phone.
This technology is available under patent license.
It offers a quickly and easily adaptable solution for various wireless access controls, particularly in the automotive sector.
Finally, these contactless access control systems are compatible with the other technologies of Freemindtronic EviToken and EviCypher. In fact, this greatly extends the possible added values in many areas such as IT Security, Home Automation Security.
These scooters carry implementations of three patents granted.
These are demonstrators with integration of an NFC device with multi-criteria authentication system of trust. Lock or unlock a vehicle without contact. This action can be subservient to several criteria of trust such as geo location, facial recognition, digital borrowing, a password.
The contactless access control system is energy-independent to operate. It uses energy recovery to power the safety and cybersecurity system.
Similarly, you independently administer and manage user profiles. The tamper-proof black box offers many ideal services for the follow-up of vehicle maintenance.
These technologies are adaptable by Freemindtronic SL Andorra tailor-made on specifications for all types of mobility projects.
There are many use cases when it comes to mobility such as, renting, carpooling, user control and protection against vehicle theft.
It is also a wave jammer resistant technology used for “Mouse Jacking” vehicle theft.
An application under Android has been developed to carry out demonstrations, such as the anti-mouse Jacking, sharing it, fleet management, but not only.
FULLTRACK NFC
FULLTRACK NFC : BETA
GUIDE D’UTILISATION : ND
Update: ND
Black Box version: ND
Free Download: ND cause application being updated
Works only with the TROTEE.NET® demonstrator.
Finalist contactless services challenge Award 2015 Freemindtronic is nominated among the finalists of the most innovative companies in NFC system service.
Top 10 – FIC 2017
NEWS PROVIDED BY
Challenge des Services Sans contact
March 2013
Related Links
Retour sur le « Challenge sans contact », un concours de startups réussi
FIC 2015 Distinction Excellence Freemindtronic
Top 19 – FIC 2015
NEWS PROVIDED BY
FIC 2015
20-21 Janvier 2015
Related Links
www.globalsecuritymag.fr
The story of the first NFC hardened USB stick EviKey that can be unlocked without contact and invisible computer systems begins with inventor Jacques Gascuel.
EviKey is a contactless USB stick which works via an NFC phone. It already has the principle of EviCypher technology. Indeed, it already carries a multi-criterion automated authentication system. It is the first physical multi-factor authentication (MFA) system that can be administered by an unfalsifiable black box.
Let’s start the story of the first contactless unlockable hardened USB stick created by the inventor, Jacques Gascuel [1]. He has implemented technology from his patented inventions internationally. For almost 10 years, he has been deeply convinced that the greatest risk will come from the hyperconnection of access controls and their centralization, under the guise of the public interest. That this risk will be all the greater when the burden of proof is reversed, so that user will be technically and financially unable to absolve himself of this legal responsibility.
The inventor includes in his reasoning for the design of electronic safes that there is a significant risk if the access control system is visible,such as a lockand/or keyboard and/or a screen and/or via software. That the best security in the world is human thinking, in contrast to other digitized biometric systems that can be corrupted. The password derived from human thought is becoming more and more complex to implement, due to the exponential increase in connected calculators. According to the inventor, it is necessary to design an augmented thought of man to oppose his own supercomputers.
A real challenge that the inventor will take up for several years to design electronic safes nomadic inviolable.
In the first phase of his research, he had to answer a first question. Is it possible to create real electronic safes for universal portable use without the use of data encryption? Can we create a universal, hyper-mobile security system that does not use an encryption system but only physical security in the sense of Cybersafety? A system, in fact, that can be used all over the world by people with no particular skill. A solution that is non-intrusive, for everyday use, always secure by default, that does not violate any of the rules of international law, and above all that allows to no longer expose man to the attainment of his physical and/or psychological integrity?
The inventor has entered into a disruptive reasoning of Cybersafety, as opposed to Cybersecurity solutions that refer to digital safes. The inventor believes that Cybersecurity is the physical security of Cybersecurity, which is digital. The inventor, a graduate in industrial electrical engineering, will base his research on the implementation of Cybernetic solutions. How can this physical security approach based on industrial normative elements such as ISA/IEC 62443 mitigate or even prevent an intrusive or non-intrusive cyberattack? The first lead was the implementation of its international patent FullProtect WO/2010/086552, a device to monitor and protect the power and/or environment of an electrical device, equipped with a black box. An invention that allows, in particular, to establish, by physical evidence, the implementation of the criteria MTTF, MTBF, MTTR and establish the TDM index . To learn more about the features and added values of an electronic safe click HERE.
The inventor’s idea is to find a way to prevent, or greatly limit, the possibility of calculating machines. The inventor imagines an autonomous, unconnected electronic safe that uses various physical, analog, logical, digital, use and legal factors that combined make it extremely complicated, computing by the machine. This will require a physical brute force attack on this electronic safe.
The inventor then designed the first MFA Offline Cyber-sterity system to assist man and allow him to defend himself against his own quantum calculators.
We will tell you the story of the birth of the electronic safe of inventor Jacques Gascuel.
The inventor assumes that the only indisputable, and undisputed, way to secure access controls is that they are never connected and totally autonomous, under the control of the man and/or the legal person.
Such an implementation would make a physically remote attack physically impossible. It talks about the principle of the physical electronic safe unconnected MFA, which implies a proximity to open the door of the electronic safe. According to the very principle of an electronic safe, this system must form a block, without any door other than that locked by an access control, via a code defined by the user. The problem of user authentication remained, and thus the use of the code illegally.
This involved designing an unconnected system, capable of providing a set of factors that would establish the near certainty that it is indeed the user and/or a rightful person.
This risk is increased if this access control is connected to a computer system and/or connected to a local server and/or remote with databases. This is a major breach to carry out attacks via the computer systems where it is connected. This risk increases significantly when access control codes are contained in computer systems and/or remote databases. We all know that they are regularly attacked because they are always accessible from a distance.
The birth of the principle of material invisibility as a physical security component of Cybersecurity
The inventor is aware that the impossibility criterion is a bold claim to be implemented in Cybersecurity. However, if it adds physical security, the foundation of Cybersafety, it makes the solution physically invisible, undetectable and untraceable. Making a physically invisible electronic safe of computer systems has become the preferred focus of the inventor’s research and development.
The term impossibility can legitimately be used, within the limits of the state of the art. Similarly, the inventor considers cyber deterrence to be part of the impossibility factor, especially when the brute force attack means implemented are disproportionate to the interest of the attack. The inventor includes the psychological aspect, …. Doubt! Indeed, consider an attacker who has no certainty of finding the coveted data because it is not directly visible, this will generate a doubt strong enough to be a deterrent. According to this approach, the attacker is also not certain whether the time it will take will not exceed the time it would take the owner of this data to make it obsolete, and therefore worthless for the attacker. The inventor therefore includes doubt as a factor of Cyber Dissuasion in the implementation of the Cybersafety of his electronic safe.
The inventor believes that the absolute security of information systems must be two-headed in the sense that Cybersecurity is the digital component of physical security.
Cybersûreté VS Cybersécurité
Cybersecurity is the physical security in contrast to Cybersecurity which is digital security. This is an approach rarely taken into account in information systems engineering that considers it legitimate that Cybersecurity is outside the realm of Cybersecurity. However, experts in these two spheres of safety agree that the complementarity between safety and security is unquestionably complementary in order to prevent the risk of accidents and/or malicious acts.
Even on the margins in the development of specifications or in the offer of Cybersecurity solutions products and services, Cybersecurity is now essential as digital systems are networked. We are in the era of “hyper-connected.” Cybersafety according to the inventor must also be taken into account from the outset in terms of risk management as defined by various ISO/DIS 34001 (SMS), CNPP 1302 [FR], ISO/IEC 27032 (digital security), ISO/IEC 27001 (SMSI), ISO/IEC 29100, CENELEC 50131-1, 50133-1, 50134-1, 50136-1, 50518-1, IEC 60839-11 [series]. A recurring divide on the interpretation of standards, specifically in their translations of English into French; the word “Security” has been translated as “security” instead of “security” in the sense of physical security. This contributes to the marginalization of the consideration of Cybersafety, and consequently, the distinction between digital safe and electronic safe.
The implementation of the electronic safe has created technological locks to be lifted
How to design a physically invisible access control, totally autonomous in electrical energy, disconnected from computer systems, disconnected from any type of network? The inventor’s idea is to design a system that is physically isolated from computer systems. It seems impossible to attack what doesn’t physically exist, either remotely or nearby.
How can this approach be implemented?
To implement the theory of invisibility, it was necessary to be able to oppose an intrusive and/or non-intrusive brute force attack. The inventor had to find a way to resist physical attacks, especially on the electronics of access control, without reducing the speed of data transfer on the USB port and SATA. The inventor then devised an electronic system with many countermeasures against physical attacks. It is a system that locks access to the contents of the memories, permanently depending on the level of attack detected. The inventor finds a patented, military-grade resin to coat all the electronics, leaving only the USB or SATA connectors. Hardened to the extreme, close to steel, the electronic safe is now equipped with a shell capable of withstanding various mechanical stresses of several tons, thermal or acidic. Attempting to remove the shell is taking the risk of triggering the countermeasures, but also of irreversibly destroying the memories.
Hardening the electronic safe has spawned other technological locks
The complete coating of the electronic card makes it impossible to repair in case of electrical, thermal, component or assembly defects. This makes it very complex to diagnose the origin of the defect automatically, and be able to access from the outside, without going through the USB and SATA connectors. This is where the Fullprotect invention comes into play, an intelligent asymmetrical circuit breaker with a black box that traces any type of electrical, environmental and/or use event. This electronic safe is then equipped with a system of electric multi-protections by automatic galvanic insulation on the power supply, with electrostatic protection on the exchange of data via the USB port or SATA, making the whole resistant to surges. Another three-point thermal environment self-protection device is capable of self-locking the electronic safe, when the temperature is above 70 degrees.
These electronic devices are coupled with the Cybersafety system, which has several advantages. The controlled galvanic insulation protects electrical hazards and insulates it from computer systems, making the electronic safe undetectable. An intelligent maintenance system is then embedded in the system. Its mission is to prevent the electronic safe from being used in temperatures that could damage the electronics. The same device is also used to detect a thermal brute force attack on three points. This type of physical intrusive brute force attack involves exceeding the thermal resistance by more than 220oC. Such an attack will in fact result in the destruction of electronic components, especially memory, irreversibly. Thanks to the implementation of the Fullprotect invention in these electronic chests, an unfalsifiable black box is present to preserve the various traces of these events and constitute an opposable physical proof.
How do I lift the MFA’s energy autonomy locks?
For the inventor, one last important problem remained to be solved: how, without a source of electrical energy, without using the electrical energy provided by the USB or SATA port, physically administer the access control through the coating and the case?
The solution found by the inventor is THAT of STMicroelectronics’ NFC technology in industrial version, NFC ISO/IEC 15693, which runs without battery, powered via a NFC-enabled Android-enabled computer (Smartphone). In addition, this component incorporates the recovery of energy capable of powering on-board subsystems, including the access control system. These industrial components have many other advantages. They have electronically secure non-volatile memory that can hold stored data for at least 40 years without an electrical source. They also allow 1 million cycles of writing per memory block, without error.
The mobile contactless electronic safes with black box were created under the technological name EviKey One NFC and EviDisk One NFC, under the trademarks of the inventor, EviKey® for the USB stick and EviDisk® for the 2.5-inch 7mm Sata III SSD.
But, beyond being able to dynamically carry out all types of actions via contactless technology, a new problem has beenborn, the Cybersecurity of the use of electronic safes. Indeed, it is necessary to have an Android/NFC smartphone to use the electronic safe. However, the smartphone is connected to it, thus exposed to the risk of remote attacks and/or proximity on the exchange of data via the NFC signal.
The Evikey NFC solution receives the 2014-2015 “Connected Object” Package with its Physical Cybersafety technology in a USB stick on November 24, 2014 in Paris Bercy. This innovation is twice nominated for the Boarding Assises: “critical on-board system” and “connected object.” This National Trophy recognizes the connected object project that has provided the most innovative service to the general public or professionals.
Paris Bercy 2014 : https://www.entreprises.gouv.fr/numerique/trophees-embarque-2014 (this page has been removed https://www.entreprises.gouv.fr)
The “Assises de l’Embarqué.fr: http://www.assisesdelembarque.fr/trophees-de-lembarque/trophees-de-lembarque-2014
Captronic : https://www.captronic.fr/Les-laureats-des-Trophees-de-l-embarque-2014.html
Electronic Press (http://www.electroniques.biz):
Embedded Trophies 2014: six companies rewarded for their innovations
lembarque.com : Freemindtronic EviKey Evidisk won the 2014 Embedded Technology Awards
The inventor had to find other systems to increase the Cybersecurity and “Cybersecurity” of MFA access control for its mobile electronic safes
The various problems to be solved are known and bring up technological locks. How do I protect the access control of an attack from the smartphone? How to identify the hardware used and authenticate the right or user to unlock the electronic safe, knowing that the smartphone is connected and can be very easily corrupted? How do I detect a brute force attack on the NFC? How can I prevent listening to the NFC signal to pick up the information? How can you physically prevent a malicious person or robot from accessing the electronic safe? How do I prevent a keylogger-type attack? How can I prevent the code from being entered on the smartphone screen? How do I limit the number of code tests, even in unlocked mode? How do I identify the electronic safe in a no-use area? How to give the illusion that the electronic safe is broken? How can the electronic safe be used on a daily basis without the burden of security or even the cause of a loss of productivity? How do you detect the end of the use of the electronic safe without having access to the data flow? How do you systematically lock the electronic safe without taking the risk of damaging the data? How do you give up a passcode that you think is corrupt? How do I create a temporary passcode? How do you put all the information back from the black box to serve as physical evidence? How do you simply plot the geolocation of the use of the passcode and the type of code used? How do I notify the user, even if the electronic system fails, the origin of the malfunction? How do I tell the user how long it will take to use memory without error? How can we ensure that the electronic safe is never obsolescent in time? Finally, could this solution save a life?
The inventor has found an answer to all these and many other questions, thanks to another of his patents, Fullsecure[2] , a stand-alone wireless access control system.
One of the most important challenges remained, the simplicity of use
The inventor’s goal is to offer individual, self-secure, unconnected, obsolescence-free, always accessible, extremely accessible, mobile, very simple to use on a daily basis, for personal and/or professional use, without financial commitment, without a license, multi-station, untraceable and undetectable.
He wanted to offer his owner the least intrusive electronic safe in the world, without drivers and software to install in his computer. An electronic safe compatible with all Windows, Linux, iOS, Raspbian, OS2, Android (OTG) operating systems that use a USB port.
A hardened electronic safe designed to last until the natural end of the components’ life. Multi-protection systems against electrical, electrostatic, thermal, mechanical, immersion in liquid, dust, ultraviolet light, heat source, magnetic field, X-rays.
An electronic safe with a black box that tells the user, in real time, the state of its physical functioning, capable of self-diagnosis and informing the user of the origin of the defect.
The freedom to adapt the level of security of these electronic safes to suit exposure to risk
A system freely set up by the user, via an administrator password, allows you to choose how to unlock the electronic safe. It can also be used in unlocked mode. In the latter case, the user uses his electronic safe in an environment where he feels there is no risk. It uses its EviKey® or EviDisk® as a standard USB stick or SSD.
How do you make Cybersafety non-binding for the user to avoid being tempted or forced to use another unsecured system?
The inventor believes that the use of safety, when it is binding, generates counter-productivity and is naturally circumvented by man. In fact, the inventor has planned different scenarios that allow the man to change the unlock mode very easily. Man is therefore empowered to adapt the level of security of his electronic safe according to his exposure to risks. When the risk is zero, the man must be able to leave the electronic safe always unlocked. This point eliminates the risk of counter-productivity. This mode allows the man to have the comfort of using a standard USB stick or external disk.
A free mode of Cybersafety by use control
The mere fact that the electronic safe is permanently unlocked creates a risk to the use, because the contents of the electronic safe are always exposed, especially when the sensitive data is not encrypted. The inventor therefore took into account this problem of exposure to the risk of connected data via a removable medium. The right balance had to be struck between safety and comfort of use.
A major constraint for the inventor: the inability to access the fully deconstructive data flow of the MFA access control system and the absence of a battery excluding the use of a clock.
The inventor’s idea was the implementation of a timer in correlation with the Cybersafety system and the black box. The user defines a time, in seconds, during which the Cybersafety system counts, via Fullprotect’s electrical analysis device, the data flow. Thus, when the countdown is reached, the electronic vault is auto-locked and the data stream is inactive.
Thanks to this method, the inventor found the right balance in usage. A system that detects when the electronic safe is not used to self-lock. It is the user who defines how long the electronic safe remains unlocked. The user will need to identify himself to unlock the electronic safe.
With this feature, the user can adjust the use of the electronic safe to his environment, while maintaining a level of self-safety over time. A time that is automatically interrupted when the electronic safe is disconnected from the USB or SATA port. In the same way if the power of the USB or SATA port is disabled by the computer system.
Let’s discover the different ways of unlocking these electronic safes designed by the inventor
A mode that requires the entry of a password to unlock the electronicsafe. A proprietary secure keyboard is used with randomly changing keys, which has the effect of combating malware that records key inputs to the Keylogger type keyboard. This system also helps to limit the risk of visual corruption when entering the password (a person looking over your shoulder for example). Indeed, it is very complex to remember the order of keys that change randomly. In addition, this system allows you to participate in the authentication of a person.
Another mode allows you to unlock the electronic safe without the need to enter the password. After recording the identity of their smartphone in the electronic safe (pairing procedure), the user can unlock it by simply presenting his smartphone to the electronic safe, without contact. The user has the ability to register up to three smartphones.
These two modes can be used interchangeably, this has some advantages. Consider two users, one has knowledge of the password and the other does not. But the latter can unlock the electronic safe with his NFC smartphone, without entering the password.
This is a convenience to avoid having to enter a password or to manage two user profiles, one of which uses only the password. However, this comfort does not cover the risk when the smartphone and electronic safe are stolen or lost together. The electronic safe can then be unlocked without the need to enter the password. To cover this risk, the inventor has planned a multi-factor mode that includes three elements: the pairing key, the smartphone’s identity and the password; the concept of a simplified physical blockchain was born.
The safety of using the electronic safe
Let’s imagine a user on the move, which implies that the level of risk is very high. It must be able to choose the highest and, indeed, most restrictive mode of security. The user leaves the comfort of unlocking with his smartphone without a password, to include a multi-factor control chain in case of theft and/or loss of the electronic safe and/or his smartphone. In case of theft or loss of the electronic safe, the malicious person will have to guess the pairing key, the identity of the paired smartphone and the password. Knowing that after 3 unsuccessful tests, the electronic safe is temporarily blocked and that the maximum allowed test is 13 before a permanent blockage.
Cybersafety against the violation of human physical and/or psychological integrity
The inventor asked himself about the risk of an attack on the physical and/or psychological integrity of an electronic safe user in order to obtain the password?
The inventor’s idea was that the electronic safe must have an advanced system of administration and user management, permanent or temporary. The administrator of the electronic safe has the option to assign a specific passcode to the user of the electronic safe, without him being able to know the administrator password.
The emergency feature called “user password forgetlessness” is born, which allows a user to delete their password. This emergency system can be activated at any time, very quickly, if it feels that its password is corrupt or that it can be corrupted. In fact, only the administrator will be able to recreate a new user password. This is the birth of the physical blockchain simplified by use. A disruptive approach to the use of oblivion in the value chain of Cybersafety as a physical barrier. This protects the physical and/or psychological integrity of the man vis-à-vis an attacker who wishes to obtain the user’s password against his consent.
Imagine an investigative journalist who goes on a mission abroad to interrogate opponents of a dictatorial regime. The information collected by the journalist is digitally housed in the electronic vault. Such information may impair the physical integrity of the interviewees or the journalist. How can the journalist resist a physical and psychological constraint not to give the password to access the electronic safe? The inventor has found a solution! If the user no longer has access to the password because he has voluntarily abandoned it, and this fact is known to the attacker, it will be useless to try to obtain from the user the administrator password that he never knew about. Only the editor (administrator) has the power to unlock the electronic safe. This does not remove the risk that the attacker will remotely pressure the editor to obtain the admin password. However, the objective is achieved, the one where the attacker has no interest in attacking the journalist. And at the same time, the digital data in the electronic safe remains locked in access. The attacker will have to be able to force the electronic safe to access the data it contains.
This case demonstrates the clear role of the importance of cybersecurity vis-à-vis Cybersecurity, the first flaw of which would be humans. On closer inspection, the inventor’s innovations put man at the center of his own enhanced security in the face of malicious attacks by man or his machines.
Cybersafety by physical silos
The inventor performed a physical silo of the rights holders, i.e., an administrator profile and user profiles, indeterminate or limited-time. There is talk of an additional factor to unlock the electronic safe, so as to block any attempt to pair the electronic safe with another smartphone. The power of Cybersafety makes it physically impossible to simply connect with the electronic safe without the pairing key. Even if the pairing key is corrupted, you also need to know the administrator and/or user password to unlock the electronic safe.
The traceability of events by unfalsifiable embedded black box, accessible without contact via the smartphone
The inventor took into account the burden of physical proof in the legal sense of the term, capable of opposing other forms of evidence constituted in a numerical way; which can be manipulated. This is one of the aspects claimed in the internationally extended Fullprotect patent.
Thus, the inventor has integrated in his electronic safe a black box that traces all types of events, which depending on their importance are recorded, such as an attempt to attack physical or digital brute force.
Such a recording in the black box of the electronic safe is not without consequences in the implementation of countermeasures imagined by the inventor whose secrets he does not reveal.
The most extreme consequence is to render the electronic safe irreversibly unusable.
Intrusive and non-intrusive brute force countermeasures
The inventor considered several aspects of brute force attack targeting cyber safety.
Dismissing non-intrusive brute force attacks was quick. It was more complex for the physical attacks of the man of the trade, the electronics engineer.
With regard to non-intrusive attack, the inventor excluded the use of encryption systems in the implementation of Cybersafety, rendering it unnecessary to use thermal, magnetic, electrical, electromagnetic or radio frequency analysis to try to guess the encryption system used. Indeed, the security system is completely independent of the digital support of the electronic vault where digital data is stored. This system is completely autonomous in electrical energy, without battery, and has only one input and exit, the industrial NFC system. This excludes all these forms of brute force attacks.
Remains the physical brute force attack that involves being in contact with the electronics of the electronic safe. An extremely strong resin and very sticky to the components makes it very dangerous to remove the resin without irreversibly damaging the electronic system, especially the memory. Traps have been built to detect intrusions and cause the electronic safe to be permanently locked through the black box.
The digital brute force attack remained to unlock or activate denial of services. The inventor also predicted these cases of species.
All these attempts are managed and activate countermeasures that block this type of attempt.
In the case of a robotic attack the attacker must create algorithms that take into account random physical variables related to physical elements specific to the electronic components used. This makes it almost impossible to create an algorithm capable of guessing these time factors, some of which are variables derived from random physical elements that depend on various thermal, electrical and usage factors.
To maintain a known use of the public, the inventor uses a system used for bank cards or SIM cards of phones.
In this case, three tests (PIN and/or mobile) are authorized to unlock the electronic safe.
After 3 unsuccessful attempts, access is blocked for 15 minutes. The event is recorded in the black box that activates the light signaling of the electronic safe (two green and blue LEDs flash alternately).
The inventor added the requirement to leave the electronic safe connected to the USB or SATA port during the locking period. Any disconnection involves reseating the countdown. This forces the attacker to leave the robot connected to the key. The Cybersafety system has a very precise electrical analysis system; any positive or negative change results in the meter being reset.
After these first 15 minutes it is possible to try again. If the entered password is correct, the electronic safe unlocks and the test counter is reset. The event is kept in the black box. If the PIN or mobile is not correct, the electronic safe is blocked again for 30 minutes this time. With each new error, the delay is multiplied by 2.
This implementation, conceived by the inventor, was intended to deter an attacker from generating a denial of services, i.e., to prevent the user of the electronic safe from using it permanently.
Thus, the attacker will have to wait a few months to be able to seize the 13th unsuccessful test, and thus make the electronic safe permanently locked.
Visionary the cyber-safety of these electronic safes in the service of BYOD, CYOD, COPE already compatible before the birth of the RGPD
Meaning BYOD acronyms “Bring Your Personal Device,” CYOD “Choose Your Company-Approved Personal Device,” COPE “your personal device purchased by the company.”
10 years earlier, the visionary inventor took into account the problem of the use of private equipment for professional use, which posed a problem related to the privacy of mobile data of various origins, both private and professional or computer systems.
BYOD, CYOD and COP are not framed in the same way at the legal level, which complicates the implementation of the security charter in a company, especially on mobile data such as USB sticks and external discs connected via a USB port. The latter poses a greater risk due to the memory capacity of several terra Bytes.
The use of data encryption is recognized as the only way to secure the data. But the reality is different in the use and security of passwords, encryption keys and/or decryption.
The inventor knows that in everyday use, the complexity of implementing a trusted encryption system is time-consuming, which reduces productivity. In fact, humans bypass the problem by using the unsecured BYOD to transport sensitive data. Similarly, the password entered to decrypt may be corrupted by various brute force attack and/or espionage.
The inventor wonders how to ensure that the Cybersafety system is able to independently cover all these risks? To solve this problem, first, he splits the types of uses into two: an individual use that he identifies as “Premium” and a collective use that he identifies as “Pro”.
Then he comes to the conclusion that the electronic safe is upstream of the backup of the mobile or fixed data, making it a common core. Thus, the mere fact that the principle of the operation of the electronic safe is closed by default and that a password is required to access the data, whether encrypted or not, constitutes a common physical barrier to all these uses. In fact, it is enough to manage the type of use and their use rights.
The professional version was born, which has a separate administration system for users of the electronic safe and an individual version whose administrator is also the sole user.
In case of loss or theft, the electronic safe is always locked which prevents access to the data it contains whether it is private or professional.
Thus, regardless of the choice of the company, CYOD, BYOD or COPE, the inventor’s electronic safes are legitimately compatible with the rules of law in force, notably with the RGPD and the decree 2018-418 of May 19, 2018 coming into force on January 1, 2019. (See on LinkedIn the article of June 13, 2018 https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/pourquoi-les-coffres-forts-%C3%A9lecttronics-nfc-offline-de-gascuel)
As part of a COPE use, the company has a function that allows it to administer a profile of the use of the electronic safe that is required of the permanent and/or temporary user. The black box traceability, allows the administrator to have a history of use, some of which are geo-located.
A 100% stealth mode can be activated by disabling LEDs. In fact, the locked electronic safe, undetectable computer systems, simulates the symptoms of a USB stick that doesn’t work. Similarly, the extinction of LEDs makes it possible not to visually indicate that readings or writings are carried out with the electronic safe. Conversely, the choice of colors, and/or the extinction of one of the LEDs, makes it possible to identify the electronic safe among others. This mode is also convenient for viewing the use of an electronic safe in a prohibited or authorized area. Let’s take the example of an entire service that uses keys whose LED flashes pink when writing or reading data, if the manager sees a key flashing yellow, he will know that this key is an intruder.
The inventor aware of the problems related to the use of USB sticks and external discs in the company has provided a concrete response with the use of his electronic safes.
It was up to the inventor to lift the last locks! How can we make the connection to electronic safes universal to any type of computer system?
Finally, the inventor had to find a way to be as intrusive as possible, when the electronic vault is connected to a particularly professional computer system that prevents the installation of unauthorized software by the information systems manager.
This problem was naturally solved when the separation of the security system and the non-volatile physical memory where the data is housed was implemented.
Indeed, since the security of the electronic safe is separated from the support, there is no need to secure the USB port or the SATA of the SSD disk, so there is no need to install security software on a computer system. In fact, all computer systems that use a USB or SATA port are immediately compatible with safes. No need for drivers or software to install for these electronic safes. This allows to respect the security constraints imposed by the company, while remaining under the control of the user.
The inventor, perfectionist, uses the speed of analog electronics systems to secure the operation of Android applications
The inventor designed two separate applications that work in the volatile memory of the NFC smartphone. FullKey NFC for EviKey NFC Pro and EviDisk NFC Pro and FullKey NFC Premium for EviKey NFC Premium and EviDisk NFC Premium. The inventor used the extreme speed of analog systems and radio frequency to exchange passwords to unlock these safes. This is a machine-to-machine (M2M) transfer between the smartphone’s NFC and the electronic safe NFC.
An intelligent physical cyber safety system is implemented at various points in electronic design to combat brute force attacks that seek to copy the weft of a radio wave produced by the NFC signal:
This listening is extremely complex to achieve because of the proximity that must exist between the smartphone and the electronic safe and the fact that the exchange of data is impulse and totally random.
Offline e-mail safes
The inventor had an unstoppable idea to fight against listening to the NFC signal! Desynchronization when unlocking the electronic safe. It adds a new variable: the unpredictable! In fact, the user can unlock his electronic safe without needing to be connected to a USB or SATA port. In fact, an attacker cannot use a computer system and/or power source as a cue to perform his listening. This effectively excludes the use of espionage. Indeed, the unlocking can be carried out anywhere, anytime, in any situation (even underwater), it physically stops any attempt to listen to the NFC signal from the inventor’s electronic safe.
Cybersecurity of Fullkey NFC Pro and Premium applications
The inventor has no confidence in the resilience of a brute force attack on applications developed on Android. In fact, it has taken into consideration immediately in its innovations that its applications can be corrupted in seconds by experts. In fact, he designs applications with a relisence criterion equal to ZERO. Thus, if the application is corrupted, no sensitive information can be used to successfully unlock the electronic safe.
The finding of the implementation of Cybersecurity for the benefit of cybersecurity of electronic safes
The mere fact of not being able to connect to the electronic safe without a pairing key is enough to establish that the inventor’s electronic safe meets all the criteria of Cyber safety.
The simple fact of not being able to unlock the electronic safe without a password, and the fact that the passwords are physically in electronics, it is also not possible to establish a connection with the electronic safe.
The inventor goes all the way to the end of the reasoning of cybersafety by black box: an on-board after-sales service and the management of obsolescence
Obviously, no doubt, never has a USB stick or an SSD been able to inform their user in real time of any type of events, including brute force attacks and to self-diagnose the state of operation of the electronic safe as well as the origin of an electronic, environmental, embedded system, use and attack intrusive or non-intrusive brute force.
Of course, all this will be true, until Jacques Gascuel’s patents fall into the public domain.
Finally, the black box allows the manufacturer, as well as the user, to know the origin of the anomalies, but not only. A flash memory usage counter is built in to estimate the risk of writing or reading errors. The aim is for the inventor to give the user the opportunity to have a trusted benchmark on his ability to retain information without error in the electronic safe. Indeed, flash memories have all the natural wear and tear due to writing that includes data erasure. This is an approximation that varies according to the memories used in the manufacture of electronic safes.
About the company
Jacques Gascuel’s patents are managed by Freemindtronic SL in Andorra.
Electronic safes are currently manufactured in France under an exclusive manufacturing and distribution license for France awarded to the SYSELEC Group in Occitanie (France).
These NFC hardened USB stick EviKey ® and NFC hardened SSD EviDisk® electronic safes are available from Freemindtronic partner’s.
You want to know more about how it works, you can view the usage guides
Fullkey Plus Android app from Freemindtronic Andorra: https://youtu.be/ckIc7PwedaE
You can also use secret keepers with EviCypher technology to manage and unlock EviKey USB sticks and EviDisk SSDs. Automatically administer and manage your pairing keys, administrator, user and guest passwords.
[1] Jacques Gascuel owns various patents. The PATENT WO/2010/086552 published internationally since 2010 for the technology called Fullprotect, a monitoring and protection device for power and/or environmental of an electrical device equipped with an unfalsifiable black box device. And the 2017/129887 WO/2017 patent for the technology called Fullsecure, a wireless electronic access control device with multi-factors of authentication.
[2] Patent called Fullsecure NO. WO/2017/129887 published in 2017 for the technology called Fullsecure, a wireless electronic access control device with multi-factors of administrative authentication.
Embedded Trophy 2014 Freemindtronic receives the award for the best secure connected object with EvIkey NFC, a secure contactless USB key.
Discover in this video, all the pictures of the Embedded Systems Conference with all the participants to this coveted Embedded Systems competition.
Discover the story behind the first EviKey NFC-enhanced USB flash drive by click here.
Discover now our other videos on our youtube channel Click here
NEWS PROVIDED BY
CAP’TRONIC / Embedded France / DGE
March 2013
Related Links
https://www.captronic.fr/Les-laureats-des-Trophees-de-l-embarque-2014.html
https://freemindtronic.com/electroniques-biz-trophy-2014-freemindtronic-evikey-nfc
https://freemindtronic.com/lembarque-trophy-2014
Enova Paris 2014 🎙️ Interview with the inventor Jacques Gascuel by Electronique. The inventor presents EviKey NFC an electronic safe in the format of a hardened secure USB key.
EviKey is invisible to computer systems when it auto-locking. It is a contactless unlocked electronic safe via an NFC phone. EviKey also carries a tamper-proof black box that ensures the traceability of random events. EviKey also has a technology for self-diagnosing the origin of these events.
Discover the story behind the first EviKey NFC-enhanced USB flash drive by click here.
Discover now our other videos on our youtube channel Click here
Watch below the video of the interview conducted during the Enova Paris 2014 exhibition.
Interviews
NEWS PROVIDED BY
http://www.electronique-mag.com
9 Octobre 2014
Related Links
https://freemindtronic.com/2014/10/08/rfid-award-2014-jacques-gascuel-presents-nfc-usb-stick-evikey/
RFID Award 2014 🎙️ Interview with the inventor Jacques Gascuel on 7-8 October 2014 in Marseille (France) participating in the RFID AWARD 2014 competitions of the 5th edition International RFID Congress scientific conferences organized by the CNRFID. The inventor presents EviKey NFC an electronic safe in the format of a hardened secure USB key.
EviKey is invisible to computer systems when it locks itself. It is a contactless unlocked electronic safe via an NFC phone. EviKey also carries a tamper-proof black box that ensures the traceability of random events. EviKey also has a technology for self-diagnosing the origin of these events.
Discover the story behind the first EviKey NFC-enhanced USB flash drive by click here.
Discover now our other videos on our youtube channel Click here
NEWS PROVIDED BY
CNRFID / Connectwave
Octobre 2014
Related Links
https://www.investinprovence.com/actualites