Last week, the Enlarged Board of Appeal finally published its long-awaited decision G1/19 about the patentability of computer simulations. Does it revolutionize the patentability of computer simulations and patents for software in general, as some had hoped? Or is it rather a controlled evolution of the EPO's framework for computer-implemented inventions? To find out I talked to a number of great experts in the field.
Of course, an invention needs to be "novel" to be patentable. But does any difference over the prior art do the trick? Or does there have to be a technically relevant difference? I sat down with Patrick Heckeler to discuss a recent EPO decision involving that question.
What types of inventions in database technology are patentable in Europe? The EPO guidelines will be updated on 1 March 2021 with a new section specifically on database management systems and information retrieval. In this episode I will walk you through the final draft of the new section to see how clear the guidance is.
Basic groundwork today. In this episode we're going through ten EPO Board of Appeal decisions which relate to AI inventions. Topics include technical character, clarity, obviousness and sufficiency of disclosure.
In this (first!) episode of The Best Practice podcast, I'll walk you through the section on AI and machine learning in the EPO’s patent examination guidelines. I'll make the point that they are too restrictive when it comes to patenting AI innovations. At the end of the episode, I'm also sharing some of my best tips for how to draft AI patent applications so that they fulfill what’s in the guidelines.
I just finished my yearly review and planning session. Here's what I did: I went through my calendar of 2020 week by week and wrote down a list of significant events, reflecting on what went well and what didn't.I listed all the roles I have in my life. For each role, I wrote down what … Continue reading 2021: The Big Three, KPIs, Principles
I just noticed that my little video about AI patents and enablement is approaching 500 views since I uploaded it last Wednesday. That's exceeding my expectations by far, so: Thank you all so much for your likes, shares and comments on Youtube and LinkedIn! Here's the video, in case you've missed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjFmVlnENek That said, there's much … Continue reading Patents for AI: much is at stake
One of my favorite questions, obviously. And it came up again in my lecture about patents for startups last Monday. Short answer: It depends on what the software does. If it solves a technical problem, then yes. For an initial "technicality" assessment, rely on your gut feeling, but ask a patent attorney who is specialized … Continue reading Can software be patented?
Do you remember the two patent applications filed in the context of the Artificial Inventor Project which named an AI system called DABUS as inventor and which were refused by the EPO? The EPO has just published the written reasons of the decisions. As a reminder, in the designation of the inventor filed in both … Continue reading Can an AI be an inventor? No, says the EPO
In case you haven't seen it already on the BARDEHLE PAGENBERG newsfeeds, my colleague Patrick Heckeler and I had a short conversation about the pending referral G1/19 and the underlying question whether computer simulations should be patentable at the EPO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAkv4_H35iE I'm very much looking forward to the Enlarged Board's decision. In fact, this decision … Continue reading Patents for computer simulations?
