The application relates to a method for providing a user of an electronic trademark filing system with an indication of the costs associated with the various options (territories, classes etc) they have selected. The calculation is carried out in real time such that the user is able to see immediately the cost implications when changes are made to any of those options. In refusing the application as a method of doing business, a computer program and a mental act, the application was found to lie squarely in the field of business. Moreover it was considered to be a computerisation using conventional programming techniques of a previously mental process that could be performed using pen and paper.
The hearing officer also explored a number of matters of principle which were raised. The approach of the UK courts in Fujitsu takes precedence over more recent EPO decisions. There is no substantial difference in what is patentable between the EPO and the UK. The TRIPS treaty is not directly effective and has not changed what is considered patentable in the UK.
Judges:
Mr A Bartlett
Citations:
[2005] UKIntelP o02705
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Intellectual Property
Updated: 24 October 2022; Ref: scu.456197
