We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
The European Patent Office is considering whether to redefine
the criteria for patenting software inventions.
Under current EPO rules, certain types of inventions are not
patentable, even if they are new and inventive. These include
software inventions that do not solve a technical problem.
The issue of how the requirement of technical aspect of a
software invention should be interpreted has been the subject of
much discussion for many years, not least because a different
definition applies in the US enabling patents on software
inventions to be obtained.
The EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal is due to consider a
referral (G3/08) on this issue. A number of interested parties,
including [key industry bodies], have made their views known to the
EPO in the hope of influencing its decision.
If the EPO decides to adopt a strict policy of examination, many
filings for software patents will not succeed. If it decides to
lower the requirements, we can expect a significant increase in
European software patent filings.
This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron
McKenna's free online information service. To register for
Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq
Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance
only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now
articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to
give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates
to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication
and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent
developments.
The original publication date for this article was
29/01/2010.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Jose Luis Romanillos, Managing Director and Founder of Finsbury Image Rights (Guernsey), takes a closer look at Guernsey’s world-first image rights legislation.
The High Court has held that Marks and Spencer infringed Interflora's trade marks when it bought keyword terms sold by Google which referenced "interflora" and advertised its own flower service on the back of them.
The High Court has published its judgment in the long-running case of Interflora -v- M&S, which has featured a number of interim rulings that have affected the law on survey evidence.
In a recent High Court judgment, it was held not only that the claimant’s patent for a coffee machine capsule extraction device was not infringed by the supply of compatible capsules by the defendant, but that the patent itself was invalid.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
New EU Patent Court System (Video Content)
