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 US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (US Court)
recently rejected a patent application titled "Casino
Game and a Set of Six-Face Cubic Colored Dice,"
related to "dice games intended to be played in gambling
casinos, in which a participant attempted to achieve a particular
winning combination of subsets of the dice." The
subject-matter of the patent application was a set of three Dice
wherein each Die (read singular for Dice) had a marking on only
some of the faces. Only a single face of the first die had a first
die marking, two faces of the second die had an identical second
die marking, and three faces of the third die had an identical
third die marking. A wager is to be placed on a particular
combination that would appear face up once the Dice are rolled. The
patent claims related to the steps of placing a wager, rolling the
set of Dice, and paying a payout amount if at least one wagered
outcome occurs.
The scope of patentability is analysed against the touchstone of
35 U.S.C. § 101(US Patents Act). Also, excluding laws of
nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas from the scope of
patentability, is a long standing precedent in the US. In deciding
the patentability, the US Court employed the 2-step test devised in
the landmark case of Mayo Collaborations.
According to the case of Mayo,, whether
the claims are patent eligible is assessed first. Once this doubt
is resolved, the Courts examine various elements of the claim to
determine the presence of 'inventive concept' sufficient to
'transform' the claimed abstract idea into a
patent-eligible application. Here, the Court observed that the
claims were directed to the abstract idea of "rules for
playing a Dice game". The Court also held that claims directed
to dice, card, and board games are not patent eligible because they
endeavour to influence human behavior rather than effect
technological change.
The only novelty (though insufficient) lay in the fact that the
Dice markings were 'printed' on
particular faces of the Dice as opposed to markings on all the
faces of a normal, conventional Dice. The Court also observed that
merely printed information without a functional relationship is not
patent eligible subject matter and falls outside the scope of
patentability as per Section 101.
The Indian position related to the patentability of such dice/
dice games is covered under Section 3 (m) of the Indian Patents
Act, 1971. It states that "a mere scheme or rule or method of
performing mental act or method of playing
game" cannot be patented.
Compiled by: Adv. Sachi Kapoor | Concept & Edited by:
Dr. Mohan Dewan
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
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.
In the process of nation's capacity building and economic resurgence, the business community within India witnessed major economic policy reforms in the last couple of years.
In Joy Creators Pvt Ltd vs Natures Essence Pvt Ltd, CS(COMM) 632/2018, the High Court of Delhi on September 20, 2018 recognized the protection of slogans and expressions which are ordinary linguistic spoken words.
