IPO Excluded fields (refused), Inventive step – The four applications all concerned gaming machines typically for use in arcades, in which there was a main game and a bonus game. The specific embodiments differed between the applications, but in all cases the inventions concerned the switching between the main game and bonus game and/or what happens in the bonus game. A central question was whether the ‘rules’ of the game are strictly limited to what the player has to do to play the game (e.g. push buttons) or whether rules can be embodied in the operation of the system itself. It was decided that where the programmed responses of the system are an integral part of the game play, this lies in the excluded field of schemes, rules or methods for playing games. In one case (GB0411822.0) an additional objection of lack of inventive step was not upheld.
Judges:
Mr A C Howard
Citations:
[2006] UKIntelP o21106, O/211/06
Links:
Statutes:
Intellectual Property
Updated: 14 October 2022; Ref: scu.454774
