Patentology съобщава, че от 1 септември 2010 година настъпват някои промени в ръководството за провеждане на експертиза относно патенти за софтуер и бизнес методи в Австралия. Промените касаят следното:
По отношение софтуера:
The update to Section 2.9.2.7 cites paragraph [38] of Invention Pathways, where it was stated that:
In Section 2.9.2.10, the above passage of Invention Pathways is also cited, in the context of a requirement that technology be "directly involved" in the creation of a "useful product". It is not enough, states the new guidance, for "technology to simply carry out the steps of the method."
Additionally, the discussion of business methods refers to paragraphs [40] and [41] of Invention Pathways, where:
English version
Patentology announced that from September 1, 2010 some changes occurred in the Australian Patent Office Manual of Practice and Procedure. The changes concern the following:
По отношение софтуера:
The update to Section 2.9.2.7 cites paragraph [38] of Invention Pathways, where it was stated that:
…the "concrete effect or phenomenon or manifestation or transformation" referred to must be one that is significant both in that it is concrete but also that it is central to the purpose or operation of the claimed process or otherwise arises from the combination of steps of the method in a substantial way…По отношение на бизнес методите:
In Section 2.9.2.10, the above passage of Invention Pathways is also cited, in the context of a requirement that technology be "directly involved" in the creation of a "useful product". It is not enough, states the new guidance, for "technology to simply carry out the steps of the method."
Additionally, the discussion of business methods refers to paragraphs [40] and [41] of Invention Pathways, where:
...it was said that "Computers and the internet are now as ubiquitous as paper and the postal service as means of collecting, displaying and disseminating information and their use as elements in a business scheme without something more, some substantial physical effect produced in the operation of the method, does not in my view and within the terms of NRDC result in an 'artificial state of affairs' any more than were those actions to be taken on paper…". Clearly (as noted at [43]) using a machine merely as a matter of convenience (and which does not result in a substantive effect) does not result in an application being patentable.Цялото ръководство може да откриете тук.
English version
Patentology announced that from September 1, 2010 some changes occurred in the Australian Patent Office Manual of Practice and Procedure. The changes concern the following:
