Site icon swarb.co.uk

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 on the ground that the subject matter is excluded under Art.52 unless the invention lies in excluded subject matter as such.’
The Hon Mr Justice Pumfrey
[2006] EWHC 70 (Pat)
Bailii
Patents Act 1977 1(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedAerotel 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 In one case a patent had been revoked on being challenged, and in the other, the . .
Appeal fromResearch In Motion UK Ltd v Inpro Licensing Sarl CA 7-Feb-2007
. .
CitedCappellini and Bloomberg, Re PatC 13-Mar-2007
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 July 2021; Ref: scu.238443 br>

Exit mobile version