Inherent in the concept of ‘an invention’ in the EPC was ‘any subject matter or activity having technical character’ and that a contribution could be patentable ‘even if it was related to the items listed in [art. 52(2)] since these items were only excluded ‘as such’ – art. 52(3)’. In order to be patentable, a contribution must be ‘technical’, or at least must have ‘technical features’ or ‘features which contribute to the technical character of the invention’.
T 0154/04
European
Citing:
Considered – Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1 CA 27-Oct-2006
In each case it was said that the requested patent concerned an invention consisting of a computer program, and was not therefore an invention and was unpatentable. In one case a patent had been revoked on being challenged, and in the other, the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents CA 8-Oct-2008
No Pattern Established to Patent Computer Systems
The Comptroller appealed against the decision in Chancery to grant a patent to the clamant for an invention which the comptroller said should have been excluded from protection under section 1(2) as a computer program. It was argued that the UK was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.276935