Inventions that fall into certain categories of excluded subject-matter, including programmes for computers, mathematical methods and mental acts, are not patentable in Europe. The EPO’s established ‘COMVIK’ approach assesses inventive step for claims that include a mixture of features that do and do not fall into categories of excluded subject-matter. If a claim feature relates to excluded subject-matter and does not contribute to a technical solution to a technical problem then it is ignored for the assessment of inventive step
Insights: IP news
We reported back in September that the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) set out a call for views on Artificial Intelligence (AI) to understand the implications AI might have for Intellectual Property (IP) policy. The UKIPO set out questions relating to each of: patents, copyright, designs, trade marks, and trade secrets. In the government’s words, the aim of the call for views was to understand the relationship between AI and IP. It did not seek to consider the impact of concepts such as AI superintelligence, or an AI as a legal entity. The call for views indicated a willingness to listen, and it was hoped that this would be beneficial for patentees, as well as the AI industry as a whole.
Breaking news: Accelerated Processing for G1/21 Enlarged Board Referral – Oral Proceedings in May 2021
The EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal has appointed oral proceedings to be held (by video conference) on 28 May 2021. The Enlarged Board will consider the legality of oral proceedings by video conference if not all parties agree to it. This is in response to oral proceedings we attended in February, where a Technical Board […]
Earlier this month WIPO, the World Intellectual Property Organization, released some key facts and figures and a press release relating to the number of patent applications that were filed in 2020 under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). The PCT system allows an applicant to file a single PCT (or “international”) application through which patent protection […]
We attended oral proceedings last month on case T1807/15 and learned that the Board of Appeal would make a referral to the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal on video conference oral proceedings without parties’ consent. We have received a copy of the written interlocutory decision of the Board of Appeal. We now know that a single question has been referred to the Enlarged Board:
The Covid-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had a huge impact on just about every aspect of our lives – transforming kitchens across the land into home offices and giving patent attorneys a crash course in the joys and challenges of home-schooling. One year on since the first UK lockdown and the ‘new normal’ no longer feels very ‘new’.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) continues to be in the news in the Intellectual Property world.In a recent development in the UK, a decision to refuse an AI patent application was heard at appeal by the UK High Court. Interestingly, the appellant was unrepresented at the High Court hearing the judgement was remotely handed down on 22 January 2021.
The EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) has today (10 March 2021) issued their decision on case G1/19 (simulations), regarding the patentability of computer simulations. Their decision does not rule out patenting computer simulations in Europe. As we have discussed previously, the referral to the EBA arose from an appeal considering the patentability of an […]