The applicants appealed rejection of their applications for patents. The comptroller-general had said that patents were in respect of computer programs excluded from registration.
Held: The appeals failed. There was no relevant technical effect in merely moving vehicles and their cargos around according to a routing algorithm.
Judges:
Pumfrey J
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 476 (Pat)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Vicom/Computer-related invention EPOBA 1987
The claimant sought a patent claiming a method for the digital processing of images and an associated apparatus (which might be a computer) for implementing the method.
Held: The claims were not to a computer program as such: ‘Generally . .
Cited – Merrill Lynch’s Application CA 1989
The invention in this case was an improved ‘data processing system for making a trading market in at least one security in which the system proprietor is acting as principal.’
Held: More than one exclusion can be in play in relation to the . .
Cited – In Re Patent Application No 9204959 by Fujitsu Ltd CA 14-Mar-1997
A computer program modelling a crystal structure is not patentable; it was not a hardware function, and software is not capable of protection under Patents law. Aldous LJ repeated his concern at the so called ‘technical contribution test’ for . .
Appeal from – CFPH LLC, Patent Applications By PatC 21-Jul-2005
In the context of deciding as to the patentability the use of the description ‘technical’ was ‘a useful servant but a dangerous master’. Peter Prescott QC discussed the importance of being clear as to the meaning of an ‘invention’ saying: ‘does it . .
Cited – Shopalotto.Com Ltd, Re Patent Application Gb 0017772.5 PatC 7-Nov-2005
. .
Reasoning disapproved – Pension Benefits EPOBA 2000
The applicant sought a European patent for a method of calculating and controlling pensions benefits. The claim was ‘1. A method of controlling a pension benefits program by administering at least one subscriber employer account on behalf of each . .
Cited – Research In Motion UK Ltd v Inpro Licensing Sarl PatC 2-Feb-2006
The court should incline towards patentability in the case of computer programs: ‘I am anxious that these exclusions are not given too wide a scope. All modern industry depends upon programmed computers, and one must be astute not to defeat patents . .
Cited by:
Cited – Kapur v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks PatC 10-Apr-2008
The applicant sought patents for systems of document management. The applications had been rejected as being for computer programs as such.
Held: The exclusion from protection created by the section was to be construed narrowly. In the absence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.249971