JP2007108888A - Intellectual property management system, intellectual property management method and its program - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To quickly and easily take countermeasures to refusal reason notification by trademark examination. <P>SOLUTION: This intellectual property management system 1 is provided with a paper strip retrieval processing part 20. The paper strip retrieval processing part 20 is provided with a self-trademark similar group output part 21, an index trademark similar group output part 22, a similar group evaluation part 23 and a merchandise/service name evaluation part 24, and configured to read the similar group code of each of an application trademark case and an index trademark from a local DB7, and to compare them with each other for displaying coincident similar group codes and incoincident similar group codes by changing those background colors on right and left screens so that the case and the index trademark can be contrasted with each other. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2007,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to an intellectual property management system, an intellectual property management method, and a program for managing information related to patent cases using a computer.

  In recent years, the usefulness of an intellectual property management system for performing application for domestic and foreign patents, utility models, designs, trademarks, etc., examination request, deadline management for intermediate processing, pension management after registration, etc. has increased.

  This intellectual property management system is an electronic application system that supports applications, a packaging management system that centrally manages a large number of intellectual property documents, and searches for a large number of intellectual property documents stored in the packaging management system using keywords. It has a function to link with other systems such as a patent information retrieval system that has been made possible, and patent offices and companies that handle information on intellectual property rights have been introducing these systems.

  For example, when applying for a trademark or finding a difference from a trademark (hereinafter referred to as a cited trademark) cited in the examination stage after application, it is necessary to perform matching of the designated product and its similar group code.

  In recent years, information on trademarks already filed on a network such as the Internet has been realized as a trademark data search service. A typical example of a trademark data retrieval service is a patent electronic library.

  In the trademark search business, it is usually possible to determine a certain degree of similarity by searching the database using the trademark name (name) of the application object as a keyword. A large-scale company has a database as described above, and it is possible to search for similar trademarks in the company.

As prior art of this kind of trademark similarity search, for example, for the names of two trademarks to be compared, the names of each other are similar by obtaining the number of sounds of at least one name and the difference in the number of sounds between the names of both names. There is already a system that performs a process of determining whether or not to perform (see, for example, Patent Document 1).
JP 2001-222557 A

  When finding the difference between the cited trademark indicated in the notice of reasons for refusal and the trademark of the applicant's own application in the examination stage after filing the trademark application, the notice of reasons for refusal only shows "Class" and "quoted trademark number". First of all, in order to grasp the contents of the application from the quoted trademark number and find the difference from the trademark of the self-application, there is a problem in that manual comparison is required and it takes time and effort to deal with it.

  In addition, as a countermeasure to avoid the reasons for refusal, companies and patent offices need to eliminate the designated designated product name by comparing the quoted trademark with the designated product name in this case. , Manual work, that is, work to delete the designated product name to be deleted by comparing the documents of the two cases, for example, in the patent field in the chemical field, because there are many designated products, it may cause an increase in work time and mistakes There was sex.

  The present invention has been made to solve such a problem. An intellectual property management system, an intellectual property management method, and an intellectual property management method capable of quickly and easily responding to a notice of reasons for refusal through trademark examination. The purpose is to provide the program.

  In order to solve the above problems, the intellectual property management system of the present invention includes a storage means for storing the contents of an applied trademark application case and a key for information on the first and second trademark application cases to be compared. An input receiving means for receiving an input or selection operation; and the storage means from the storage means by using the application number, product name and / or kind received as information of the first trademark application case by the input receiving means as a keyword. The first acquisition means for acquiring the similar group code, the designated product / service name of one trademark application case, and the application number and class received as information on the second trademark application case by the input receiving means as keywords. The second acquisition means for acquiring the similar group code of the second trademark application case and the designated product / service name from the storage means, and the first and second acquisition means The similar group evaluation means for comparing the acquired similar group codes and presenting the matched similar group codes and the unmatched similar group codes separately, and presented by the similar group code evaluation means, When the matched similar group code is selected, the designated goods / service names of the first and second trademark application cases designated in the similar group code are compared, and the designated designated goods / service names matched. And designated product / service name evaluation means for distinguishing and presenting designated products / service names that do not match.

  An intellectual property management method according to the present invention is an intellectual property management method for managing information related to a trademark application case by a computer, wherein an application number, a product name, or a class received as information of the first trademark application case is obtained. As a keyword, from the storage means for storing the contents of the trademark application case, the step of obtaining the similar group code of the first trademark application case, the designated product / service name, and the second trademark application case as information The similar group code of the second trademark application case and the designated product / service name are obtained from the storage means by using the obtained application number and class as a keyword, and the similar group code obtained for each is compared. A step of discriminating and presenting a matched similar group code and a mismatched similar group code, and when the matched similar group code is selected and operated. The designated product / service name of the first and second trademark application cases designated in the similar group code are compared, and the matched designated product / service name is matched with the mismatched designated product / service name. And a step of presenting them separately.

  The program of the present invention is a program that causes a computer to function as an intellectual property management system that manages information related to trademark application cases, and that compares the computer with storage means for storing the contents of the applied trademark application cases. Input accepting means for accepting key input or selection operation of information on the first and second trademark application cases, and the application number and product name accepted as information on the first trademark application matter by the input accepting means The second trademark is obtained by the first acquisition means for acquiring the similar group code of the first trademark application case and the designated product / service name from the storage means using the keyword as a keyword and / or the like, and the input reception means. Similarity of the second trademark application case from the storage means with the application number and type accepted as information of the application case as keywords A second acquisition unit that acquires a code, a designated product / service name, and a similar group code acquired by each of the first and second acquisition units; When the matching similar group code presented by the similar group code evaluation means and the similar group code evaluation means are selected and operated, the first group specified in the similar group code is displayed. Compare the designated product / service name in the second trademark application and compare it with the designated designated product / service name that matches the designated product / service name that does not match. It is characterized by.

  In the present invention, the similar group code and the designated product / service name of the first trademark application case are acquired, and the second application is used as a keyword for the application number and class received as information of the second trademark application case. The similar group code and the designated product / service name of the trademark application case are acquired, the acquired similar group codes are compared, and the matched similar group code and the unmatched similar group code are distinguished and presented.

  Then, when the matching similar group code is selected and operated in the presentation, the designated product / service names of the first and second trademark application cases specified in the similar group code are compared and matched. The designated product / service name that does not match the designated product / service name is displayed separately, so the operator can specify the designated product / service name that is duplicated in the first trademark application case and the second trademark application case. It can be easily identified.

  According to the present invention, it is possible to respond quickly and easily when there is a notice of reasons for refusal by trademark examination.

Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.
FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration of an intellectual property management system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

  This intellectual property management system stores, for example, a control device such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) that executes a program, a ROM (Read Only Memory), a program or data being executed, and a work area in data processing. Main memory such as RAM (Random Access Memory) as main memory, database (hereinafter referred to as DB) as storage means, auxiliary storage such as hard disk drive for storing programs and data, input devices such as keyboard and mouse, And a network system configured by connecting a plurality of computers through a network. As the network, various networks such as a telephone line, an ISDN line, a local area network (hereinafter referred to as LAN), and a wide area network (hereinafter referred to as WAN) can be used.

  As shown in FIG. 1, a computer constituting the intellectual property management system 1 is installed in, for example, a company or a patent office, and is a Web server that provides a trademark data search service via, for example, the LAN 2 and the Internet 3. 4 is connected. The Web server 4 is provided with an intellectual property information DB 5 as storage means. The Web server 4 functions as a means for providing intellectual property information.

  The intellectual property information DB 5 stores application information related to patents, utility models, designs, trademarks, and the like. The application information relating to the trademark includes, for example, the contents of the applied trademark (data of each application trademark, examination progress data, registered trademark), a similar group table, and the like.

  As application trademark data, application date, registration date, title, class, similar group code, designated product name, mark, etc. are stored as information on individual application trademark cases.

  In the similar group table, similar group codes (for example, 01A01, 01A02..., 34Z99, 35A01... 45Z99, etc.) in which products / services are classified as being similar in advance are classified into classes (for example, 1, 2, 10, 10, 11 ... 45, etc.). ), Names of products / services (hereinafter referred to as product / service names) are stored correspondingly. The similar group code and class indicate the category of goods / services, and are defined in, for example, the first class to the 45th class.

  In the local DB 7, for example, when a patent office is installed with this system, all application data filed at the office is accumulated. In the case of a company, all application data filed by the company is accumulated. Further, similar group table is stored in the local DB 7 like the IP information DB 5 described above. Furthermore, what is downloaded from the intellectual property information DB 5 or the like for the publications exemplified as citations in the notification of reasons for refusal is accumulated. That is, the local DB 7 stores a part of application data of the intellectual property information DB 5 and a similar group table.

  The intellectual property management system 1 includes an application information management unit 6 that manages basic data such as patents, utility models, designs, and trademarks, a local DB 7, an input unit 8, a display unit 10, an external intellectual property information DB 5, and A DB linkage unit 9 that performs DB linkage with the local DB 7 in the system, a document creation unit 11, a trademark similar group search processing unit 20 (hereinafter referred to as a strip search processing unit 20), and the like are provided.

  The strip search processing unit 20 includes an own trademark similar group output unit 21 as a first acquisition unit, a cited trademark similar group output unit 22 as a second acquisition unit, a similar group evaluation unit 23, a product / service name evaluation unit 24, and the like. Have. The input unit 8 corresponds to the above-described input device and a file capturing function realized by software, and the display unit 10 corresponds to a display interface between a display device such as a monitor and a computer.

  The input unit 8 functions as an input receiving unit that receives a key input or selection operation of information on two trademark application cases to be compared (the own trademark application case and the cited trademark).

  The DB linkage unit 9 reads an XML format rejection reason notification file received from the JPO server (not shown) through the Internet 3 or ISDN line (not shown), and extracts reference information from the tag information. Then, the DB (either the intellectual property information DB 5 or the local DB 7) in which the corresponding reference information exists is selected, the corresponding DB is accessed, and the information is downloaded (acquired).

  In this example, for the trademark publication (trademark 3200001 in this example) indicated by the quoted trademark tag in the rejection reason notification file, the DB linkage unit 9 accesses the Web server 4 on the Internet 3 and Based on the publication number, the intellectual property information DB 5 is searched, and the corresponding publication is downloaded and stored in the local DB 7.

  Further, the DB cooperation unit 9 selects the internal DB 6 for the trademark 320001 (first trademark application case) of the trademark registration application number tag in the rejection reason notification file, and makes it the search target. XML is eXtensible Markup Language.

  A number of document templates (application, opinion, procedure amendment, etc.) relating to patents, utility models, designs, trademarks, etc. are set in the document creation unit 11 in advance.

  The document preparation unit 11 compares the trademark application case (first trademark application case) with the cited trademark (second trademark application case) by the product / service name evaluation unit 24 and does not agree with the designated designated product / service name. The designated product / service name is displayed on the screen of the display unit 10, that is, presented to the user, the check box 62 of the designated designated product / service name is checked, and the delete execution button 63 is operated, that is, “delete”. `` Inserts (reflects) the contents (application number, trademark, class, designated trademark name, etc.) of the trademark application into the corresponding document template (in this case, the template for the amendment of the procedure), and deletes it. It functions as a document creation means for creating a corresponding plan for the contents (standard text) to be deleted from the trademark application for the designated designated product / service name that has been operated.

  That is, the strip search processing unit 20 is a part of functions provided in the intellectual property management system 1.

  The cited trademark similar group output unit 22 extracts the publication number from the rejection reason notification file B1 by detecting the tag of the cited trademark in the rejection reason notification file B1, and requests the DB cooperation unit 9 to acquire the quoted trademark. Is sent out.

  The DB linkage unit 9 accesses the Web server 4 on the Internet 3 based on the received publication number, downloads the publication by searching the intellectual property information DB 5, and stores it in the local DB 7.

  The quoted trademark similar group output unit 22 receives the notification from the DB cooperation unit 9 after the DB cooperation unit 9 downloads the publication, reads the corresponding publication from the DB 6, and acquires the similar group code, the designated product / service name, etc. Temporarily store in memory.

  In other words, the cited trademark similar group output unit 22 uses the input unit 8 to input the similar group code, class, designated product / service name of the cited trademark from the local DB 7 using the application number and the class received as the cited trademark information as keywords. It functions as a second acquisition means that acquires and stores it in the memory.

  The own trademark similar group output unit 21 extracts the application number from the rejection reason notification file B1 by detecting the tag of the trademark application case (hereinafter referred to as the own case) of the rejection reason notification file B1, and extracts the application number, The local DB 7 is searched from the category and / or product name, and the similar group code, designated product / service name, etc. are acquired and temporarily stored in the memory.

  That is, the own trademark similar group output unit 21 reads the contents of the own case (trade name, type, designated product / service name, etc.) from the local DB 7 based on the application number regarding the own case that received the notice of reasons for refusal. A process of deriving a similar group code from the category and the designated product name is performed. In case of own case, search local DB7 using keywords such as title, application date, registration date, class and designated product / service name, etc., hit application number and registration number, and derive similar group code May be.

  The similar group evaluation unit 23 compares the similar group codes acquired by the cited trademark similar group output unit 22 and the own trademark similar group output unit 21, respectively, and distinguishes the matched similar group code from the mismatched similar group code. It functions as a similar group evaluation means presented separately. The presentation includes displaying the comparison result on the display unit 10 and printing the comparison result on a printer (not shown). The similar group evaluation unit 23 has a function of deleting the presentation content in addition to the comparison result presentation function.

  For example, when similar groups overlap, the similar group evaluation unit 23 deletes all product names belonging to the similar group. Therefore, there are two methods: a method of confirming the product name and executing deletion, and a method of deleting in units of similar groups, and the deletion is executed mainly in units of similar groups as described above.

  When the similar group code of the own case is not obtained by the own trademark similar group output unit 21 or when there is no similar group code that matches each other, the similar group evaluation unit 23 It functions as a means for displaying service names.

  Specifically, the similar group evaluation unit 23 is a graphic user who visually clarifies the product similarity range regarding the similar group codes derived by the cited trademark similar group output unit 22 and the own trademark similar group output unit 21. An interface screen (hereinafter referred to as a GUI screen) is generated, output (displayed) on the display unit 10, and presented to the user. The GUI screen displayed on the display unit 10 is referred to as a “similar group comparison screen 51”.

  As shown in FIG. 2, the similar group comparison screen 51 includes two screens on the left and right for each case, and includes a delete execution button 53 and a correction document output button 54.

  The retrieved similar group codes are displayed corresponding to the left and right screens for each case. The similar group evaluation unit 23 displays the character color in a different color from the others for visual clarification of similar group codes that overlap between cases. In this embodiment, information on the case is displayed on the left screen, and information on the quoted trademark is displayed on the right screen.

  A check box 51 is provided at the position of each similar group code. If desired, all the product names included in the similar group of the corresponding similar group code are deleted and corrected by checking the check box 51. A document is created. Each similar group code has an anchor (link), and the product / service name evaluation unit 24 is activated by double-clicking on that portion, and the designated product / service name of each comparison item belonging to the similar group is read from the memory. Is displayed in a list.

  Note that, as a result of comparing the cases, the similar group evaluation unit 23 reads the designated product / service name of each trademark application case from the memory and displays it on the display unit 10 when there is no matching similar group code.

  The product / service name evaluation unit 24 displays a similar group code when a desired code is selected from the matched similar group codes displayed by the similar group evaluation unit 23 on the display unit 10 by, for example, double-clicking. Designated product / service name that compares the designated product / service name of this project with the quoted trademark specified in, and distinguishes between the specified designated product / service name and the mismatched designated product / service name. Functions as an evaluation means.

  The product / service name evaluation unit 24 has a function of deleting the presentation content in addition to the comparison result presentation function.

  For example, when the designated product / service name is duplicated, the product / service name evaluation unit 24 deletes the corresponding designated product name of this case by selecting and deleting the duplicate product / service name by the operator.

  In other words, the present system has two functions: a function for confirming product / service names and deleting duplicates, and a function for deleting product / service names in units of similar groups.

  The product / service name evaluation unit 24 is a product name comparison screen (GUI screen) for designating a product / service name that should be confirmed and excluded in the same manner as described above at the level of the specified product / service more detailed than the similar group code. Is output to the display unit 10 and displayed on the display unit 10.

  As shown in FIG. 3, the product name comparison screen 61 includes two screens on the left and right for each item, and includes a delete execution button 63 and a correction document output button 64.

  The designated product / service names retrieved are displayed corresponding to the left and right screens for each case. The product / service name evaluation unit 24 displays the color of the character for the designated product / service name that overlaps between the cases in a different color from the other for visual clarification. In this embodiment, information on the case is displayed on the left screen, and information on the quoted trademark is displayed on the right screen. A check box 61 is provided at the position of each designated product / service name. When the check box 61 is checked as desired, the corresponding designated product / service name is to be deleted.

  In other words, the product / service name evaluation unit 24, when displayed on the product name comparison screen 61, performs an operation for changing the designated designated product / service name that matches, the editing is performed to change the presentation content according to the operation content. Functions as a means.

  Specifically, the product / service name evaluation unit 24 compares the product / service names of the projects with each other, and as a result, the matching designated product / service name and the mismatched designated product / service name are displayed in different formats. A GUI screen (product name comparison screen 61) to be displayed corresponding to each item is generated and output to the display unit 10. In this example, designated products / service names that overlap each other's cases are displayed with different background colors. In FIG. 3, the portion of the duplicate product name is indicated by diagonal lines.

Hereinafter, the operation of the intellectual property management system 1 will be described with reference to FIG.
In the case of the intellectual property management system 1, as shown in FIG. 4, in addition to the trademark to be applied (name, mark, etc.), for example, the category “10, 11, 15”, the designated product “pacifier, ice pillow, andon ...” It is assumed that an application document A1 describing the above is prepared and a trademark application is filed. The contents of the application document A1 are stored in the local DB 7 on the system.

  After the trademark application, if it is determined that the content of the present application is similar to the trademark of the prior application during the examination process (examination stage) at the JPO, the reason for refusal is sent out in the form of electronic data or paper.

  Here, the electronic data rejection reason document (rejection reason document file) is transmitted from the patent office server (not shown) through the Internet 3 or ISDN line (not shown), and this intellectual property management system 1 or this system 1 is received by another application computer connected to LAN 1 via LAN 2. The reason for refusal contains the cited trademark (hereinafter referred to as cited trademark) and the like.

  Here, when the strip search processing unit 20 is activated by a predetermined operation (such as a double-click operation of an icon on a computer screen) in order to perform a similar search for two comparison-target trademarks (this case and a cited trademark), the comparison is performed. A screen (not shown) for searching for two target trademarks (this case and a quoted trademark) is displayed.

  In this screen, first, when the rejection reason notification file B1 is specified and the file reading operation is executed, the own trademark similar group output unit 21 extracts the application number of the own case from the tag of the rejection reason notification file B1. Then, the local DB 7 is searched using the extracted application number as a keyword, and the application document file (application data) A1 of the subject case is obtained.

  In addition, after calling the information of the own case first, and entering the information of the reason for rejection in the template document file of OA (office action) for the reason for rejection, switch to the search screen by tab operation on the screen In addition, comparisons may be made based on information on types and designated products.

  Subsequently, the own trademark similar group output unit 21 searches the local DB 7 using the designated product name included in the application document file (application data) A1 as a keyword, acquires a similar group code (S101 in FIG. 4), and the memory. (S102).

  When the local DB 7 is searched using the product name as a keyword, a similar group code may not be acquired. In this case, the own trademark similar group output unit 21 searches the local DB 7 using a class included in the application document file (application data) A1 as a keyword, acquires a similar group code (S103), and stores it in the memory (S102). ).

  In addition, the search by the said brand name and kind may be any one, and may perform both. Two search results, that is, the same similar group code, may be stored as separate search results in separate areas, or may be stored together as one by eliminating duplication.

  On the other hand, the quoted trademark similar group output unit 22 extracts the publication number of the quoted trademark from the tag of the rejection reason notification file B1 from the rejection reason notification file B1, and sends a request for acquiring the quoted trademark to the DB cooperation unit 9. To do.

  Upon receiving this request, the DB linkage unit 9 accesses the Web server 4 of the Internet 3 based on the publication number, downloads the relevant publication by searching the intellectual property information DB 5, and stores it in the local DB 7.

  The quoted trademark similar group output unit 22 receives the notification from the DB cooperation unit 9 after the DB cooperation unit 9 downloads the relevant publication from the external intellectual property information DB 5, reads the relevant publication from the local DB 7, and reads the similar group code, The designated product / service name is extracted (obtained) (S105) and temporarily stored in the memory.

  Next, the similar group evaluation unit 23 reads out the similar group codes of the respective cases respectively acquired and stored in the memory by the own trademark similar group output unit 21 and the cited trademark similar group output unit 22, and is similar to each other. Compare group codes.

  As a result of the comparison, the similar group evaluation unit 23 distinguishes the matched similar group code and the mismatched similar group code, displays them on the similar group code comparison screen 51 (see FIG. 2) (S106), and presents them to the operator.

  On the similar group code comparison screen 51, the background portion of the similar group code that matches (overlaps) is colored with a different color from other colors, that is, is color-coded, so that the operator can easily confirm the overlapping similar group code at a glance. it can.

  Of the similar group codes displayed (presented) on the similar group code comparison screen 51, the operator enters the check box 52 of the desired similar group code to be deleted among the similar group codes that match (duplicate) the cited trademark. When a check is made with a mouse operation or the like and the delete execution button 53 is pressed, the similar group evaluation unit 23 deletes the designated product name belonging to the similar group code of this case from the memory.

  When the operator depresses the correction output button 54 on the similar group code comparison screen 51 after deleting the designated product name belonging to the similar group code that overlapped with the cited trademark, the document creation unit 11 belongs to the remaining similar group code. Read specified product name from memory in HTML format or XML format, insert (reflect) the contents into the preset document template, and delete the specified product name belonging to the corresponding similar group code from the contents of this project A procedure amendment draft, which is a response draft in which the amendment tag to be inserted is inserted, is created, and a document editing screen is displayed.

  Among the similar group codes displayed (presented) on the similar group code comparison screen 51, one of the matched similar group codes is selected by an operation such as a double click operation at the position of the desired similar group code. When it is done (S107), the product / service name evaluation unit 24 reads the designated product / service name of the case from the memory according to the anchor (link), and compares the designated product / service name with each other.

  As a result of the comparison, the product / service name evaluating unit 24 distinguishes between the designated product / service name that matches and the designated product / service name that does not match, and displays them on the product name comparison screen 61 (S108). Present.

  On the product name comparison screen 61, the background portion of the matched (duplicated) product name is colored with a different color from other colors, that is, is color-coded, so the operator can easily identify the product name of the project that overlaps the quoted trademark. Can be easily confirmed.

  Among the designated product names displayed (presented) on the product name comparison screen 61, the operator operates the mouse in the designated product name check box 62 of the designated product name that matches (duplicates) the quoted trademark. When the check box is checked and the delete execution button 63 is pressed, the product / service name evaluation unit 24 deletes the product name of this case from the memory (S109).

  When the operator depresses the correction document output button 64 on the product name comparison screen 61 after deleting the designated product name that has been duplicated, the document creation unit 11 displays the remaining designated product name in HTML format or XML format. The procedure amendment is a response proposal in which the amendment tag is inserted with the contents for deleting the designated product / service name that has been deleted from the case, and the contents are inserted (reflected) into the preset document template by downloading from the local DB 7 Create a draft and display the screen for editing the document.

  The operator can create a formal procedure amendment by simply inputting or correcting supplementary items to the procedure amendment draft displayed on the document editing screen.

  After the desired designated product name is deleted, the remaining designated product names are displayed on the product name comparison screen 61. By checking the corresponding check box 62, the designated product name disappears. Deletion can be repeated any number of times.

  Although the above operation has been described with respect to an example in which the similar group codes of the two trademarks to be compared (this case and the cited trademark) match, the searched similar group codes do not always match. In particular, in the similar group code search of the own case, the similar group code may not be hit (not applicable).

Hereinafter, with reference to FIG. 5, in the similar group code search of the own case, when the similar group code did not hit (not applicable), or the similar group code obtained by the search did not match Will be described.
Note that the operations (S201, S203, S204, and S205 in FIG. 5) until the similar group code is acquired from each item to be compared are the same as the operations described in FIG. 4, and the description thereof is omitted.

  If the own trademark similar group output unit 21 searches the local DB 7 using the designated product name or type included in the application document file (application data) A1 as a keyword, and the similar group code cannot be acquired, it is stored in the memory. “Not applicable” is stored as the similar group code (S202 in FIG. 2).

  The similar group evaluation unit 23 reads out the similar group codes of the respective cases acquired and stored in the memory by the own trademark similar group output unit 21 and the cited trademark similar group output unit 22 and stores the similar group codes of each case. The comparison result is displayed on the similar group code comparison screen 51 (see S206 in FIG. 5) and presented to the operator.

  In this case, on the similar group code comparison screen 51, the name “Not Applicable” is displayed on the left screen of the case, and the mismatched similar group codes are displayed on both the left and right screens. In this example, “Not Applicable” is displayed on the left screen of this case, and “42X10”, “14-17D01”, and the like are displayed on the right screen of the cited trademark.

  Here, when the operator checks the “not applicable” check box 55 and presses the execution button 56 (S207), the product / service name evaluation unit 24 stores the designated product names of the case and the cited trademark in the memory. Alternatively, it is read from the local DB 7 and displayed on the product name comparison screen 61 (S208) and presented to the operator. The operator can compare and confirm the designated product name by looking at this screen.

  Since the product name comparison screen 61 is provided with a check box 62 for each designated product name, the operator designates a designation to be deleted among the designated product names displayed (presented) on the product name comparison screen 61. When the product name check box 62 is checked and the delete execution button 63 is pressed, the designated product name of this case is deleted from the memory (S209).

  When the operator depresses the correction document output button 64 on the product name comparison screen 61 after deleting the desired designated product name, the document creation unit 11 adds the deleted content of the case to the preset document template. In addition to inserting (reflecting), a procedure amendment draft, which is a response proposal for deleting the designated designated product / service name from this project, is created and a document editing screen is displayed.

  As described above, according to the intellectual property management system 1 of this embodiment, the similarity between the cited trademark shown in the notice of reasons for refusal sent from the JPO and the trademark of the own application at the examination stage of the applied trademark. When investigating the sex, the similar group code, class and product / service name are extracted using the number of the cited trademark obtained from the notice of reasons for refusal as a keyword, and compared with the content of the trademark of the self-application. Are displayed side by side on the left and right screens for each case, the operator can easily compare each other.

  Similar group codes and product names that are duplicated in the quoted trademark are displayed in different colors, and the selected trademark by the check boxes 52 and 62 and the delete execution buttons 53 and 63 can be used to avoid the reason for refusal. Deduplication with similar group codes and product names can be facilitated.

Further, after eliminating the duplicate class and product name, the procedure amendment to delete the class and product name is created and displayed (output) simply by pressing the amendment output button 64. Response work can be done in a short time.
As a result, it is possible to quickly and easily respond when there is a reason for rejection.

More specifically, the intellectual property management system 1 provides the following effects.
(1) In a trademark application that has received a notice of reasons for refusal, it is possible to realize commonality and simplification of system operation for end users by realizing the flow of trademark search operations as one system.

  (2) A similar group code can be easily derived as a result of automatic processing by the system for a trademark document (cited trademark) that has been cited as an refusal reason notification.

  (3) The system automatically compares the similar group code of the trademark document (cited trademark) that was cited as the notice of reasons for refusal with the similar group code of the trademark similar group code of the self-application, and has a screen structure that is visually easy to understand. By displaying, the ease of work can be realized, and work mistakes can be suppressed as much as possible.

  (4) The system automatically compares the designated product name / service name of the trademark document (quoted trademark) described in the notice of reasons for refusal with the designated product name / service name of its own application. Each name is color-coded and displayed on a screen that is visually understandable to the user, so that it is possible to respond quickly and easily to the reason for rejection, and to minimize business errors as much as possible.

  In other words, when performing a series of processes related to trademark application and intermediate processing, by adding the strip search processing unit 20 to one system called the intellectual property management system 1, the user can hold different systems and There is no need to perform confirmation, similarity search, creation of a countermeasure, and the like, and operations can be shared and simplified in business units.

  As a result, it is possible to share and simplify the computer operation in the business corresponding to the intermediate processing of the applied trademark, and the accurate investigation and evaluation can be performed in a short time.

  In addition, although one embodiment was described in order to implement | achieve this invention above, this invention is not limited only to the above-mentioned embodiment, In the range which does not deviate from the summary of this invention, a various change can be added. I can.

It is a figure which shows the structure of the intellectual property management system of one Embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows the comparison screen of a similar group code. It is a figure which shows the comparison screen of a brand name. It is a flowchart which shows operation | movement when the similar group code of a comparison object corresponds in this intellectual property management system. It is a flowchart which shows operation | movement when the similar group code of a comparison object does not correspond in this intellectual property management system.

Explanation of symbols

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Intellectual property management system, 2 ... LAN, 3 ... Internet, 4 ... Web server, 5 ... Intellectual property information DB, 6 ... Application information management part, 7 ... Local DB, 8 ... Input part, 9 ... DB cooperation part DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 10 ... Display part, 11 ... Document preparation part, 20 ... Trademark similar group search processing part (strip search processing part), 21 ... Own trademark similar group output part, 22 ... cited trademark similar group output part, 23 ... similar group evaluation Department, 24 ... Product / Service Name Evaluation Department, A1 ... Application Document File, B1 ... Rejection Reason Notice File.

Claims (8)

Storage means for storing the contents of the applied trademark application,
Input accepting means for accepting key input or selection operation of information of the first and second trademark application cases to be compared;
The input unit accepts the application number, product name and / or class received as information on the first trademark application case as a keyword from the storage means, and designates the similar group code of the first trademark application case A first acquisition means for acquiring a product / service name;
By using the application number and the class received as information of the second trademark application case by the input accepting means as keywords, the similar group code, designated product / service name of the second trademark application case are obtained from the storage means. A second acquisition means for acquiring;
A similar group evaluation means for comparing similar group codes acquired by the first and second acquisition means, respectively, and distinguishing and showing a matched similar group code and a mismatched similar group code;
When the matched similar group code is selected and operated by the similar group code evaluation means, the designated product of the first and second trademark application cases designated in the similar group code An intellectual property management system comprising: a designated product / service name evaluation unit that compares service names and presents the designated designated product / service name that matches with the designated product / service name that does not match.   2. The intelligent system according to claim 1, further comprising an editing unit that changes the content of the presentation according to an operation for changing the matched designated product / service name presented by the designated product / service name evaluation unit. Property management system. The similar group evaluation means includes:
2. The intellectual property according to claim 1, further comprising: a user interface that displays the matched similar group code and the mismatched similar group code as a result of the comparison, corresponding to each case by changing the display format. Management system. The designated product / service name evaluation means is:
2. The user interface according to claim 1, wherein, as a result of the comparison, the matching designated product / service name and the mismatched designated product / service name are displayed in correspondence with each item by changing the display format. Intellectual property management system. The similar group code evaluation means includes:
When the similar group code of the first trademark application case is not obtained by the first acquisition means, or when there is no similar group code that matches each other case, the designated product / service name of each trademark application case is displayed. 2. The intellectual property management system according to claim 1, further comprising means for displaying.   When at least one of the specified product / service name is deleted by the editing means, the content of the first trademark application case after deletion is reflected in a preset document template and the corresponding designation is deleted. 3. The intellectual property management system according to claim 2, further comprising: a document creation unit that creates a response plan with a content that deletes a product / service name from the content of the first trademark application case. An intellectual property management method for managing information related to trademark application cases by a computer,
The similar group code of the first trademark application case, designation from the storage means for storing the contents of the trademark application case, using the application number, product name or class received as the information of the first trademark application case as a keyword A step of obtaining a product / service name;
Obtaining a similar group code of the second trademark application case, a designated product / service name from the storage means using the application number and the class received as information of the second trademark application case as keywords;
Comparing the obtained similar group codes to each other, and distinguishing and showing the matched similar group codes and the mismatched similar group codes;
In the presented case, when the matched similar group code is selected, the designated product / service name of the first and second trademark application cases specified in the similar group code are compared, An intellectual property management method comprising: a step of distinguishing and presenting a matching designated product / service name and a mismatched designated product / service name. A program that causes a computer to function as an intellectual property management system that manages information related to trademark application cases,
The computer,
Storage means for storing the contents of the applied trademark application,
Input accepting means for accepting key input or selection operation of information of the first and second trademark application cases to be compared;
The input unit accepts the application number, product name and / or class received as information on the first trademark application case as a keyword from the storage means, and designates the similar group code of the first trademark application case A first acquisition means for acquiring a product / service name;
By using the application number and the class received as information of the second trademark application case by the input accepting means as keywords, the similar group code, designated product / service name of the second trademark application case are obtained from the storage means. A second acquisition means for acquiring;
A similar group evaluation means for comparing similar group codes acquired by the first and second acquisition means, respectively, and distinguishing and showing a matched similar group code and a mismatched similar group code;
When the matched similar group code is selected and operated by the similar group code evaluation means, the designated product of the first and second trademark application cases designated in the similar group code A program characterized by comparing service names and functioning as designated product / service name evaluation means for distinguishing and presenting matched designated products / service names and mismatched designated products / service names.

Images