In August 2015 Indian Patent Office Patent Office released guidelines for CRIs and these were opposed by iSPIRIT and others. In Feb 2016 Patent office came out with revised guidelines.
The main Difference:
1. August 2015 guidelines has illustrated examples of claims which are patentable, where as Feb 2016 guidelines completely dropped the list.
2. The August guidelines carry a checklist on what is not excluded under section 3(k) of the patent act taking a liberal view of technical contribution. The February guidelines restated the known position leaving it to interpretation of examiner.
While there is no ambiguity of computer program, which is not patentable in India, the ambiguity is about combined software and hardware invention.When the technical contribution is on a process which is carried on outside computer, patents were allowed. Expanding the non-exclusive list to computer programmes making the computer a better computer is opposed and dropped.
The main Difference:
1. August 2015 guidelines has illustrated examples of claims which are patentable, where as Feb 2016 guidelines completely dropped the list.
2. The August guidelines carry a checklist on what is not excluded under section 3(k) of the patent act taking a liberal view of technical contribution. The February guidelines restated the known position leaving it to interpretation of examiner.
While there is no ambiguity of computer program, which is not patentable in India, the ambiguity is about combined software and hardware invention.When the technical contribution is on a process which is carried on outside computer, patents were allowed. Expanding the non-exclusive list to computer programmes making the computer a better computer is opposed and dropped.
No comments:
Post a Comment