Section 3(k) Archives

Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

This article analyzes India’s legal stance on the patentability of algorithmic processes under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970. Focusing on the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Blackberry Limited vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the post explores key arguments, legal precedents, and implications for software patents in India. Continue Reading Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

September 23, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 409Views 2Likes

ShareFacebook

Computer Programs with Technical Effect such as enhancing speed and efficiency are patentable, reiterates the Delhi High Court

In an appeal decision, the Delhi High Court recently overturned the rejection of two patent applications filed by Ab Initio Technology LLC, concerning data processing methods. These applications, Nos. 6500/DELNP/2011 and 6501/DELNP/2011, were refused by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs on the grounds of non-patentability under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970, as they were deemed to be computer programs per se, and for failing to meet the criteria for divisional applications under Section 16(1). Ab Initio Technology…

August 29, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 379Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

The Madras High Court criticized the Patent Office for using outdated CRI guidelines of 2016 instead of the revised 2017 guidelines in evaluating Microsoft’s patent application. The court emphasized the importance of assessing technical effect or contribution in CRIs without considering hardware. Continue Reading Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

May 28, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 515Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

A Deep Dive into Section 3(k) Analysis of Ericsson’s Eight Patents – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part VII

This post analyzes an Indian court case between Ericsson and Lava focusing on Section 3(k) of the Patents Act. This section prohibits patents on mathematical methods, business methods, computer programs, and algorithms. The court evaluated the patentability of eight patents related to mobile communication technologies under Section 3(k). Continue Reading A Deep Dive into Section 3(k) Analysis of Ericsson’s Eight Patents – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part VII

May 8, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 811Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Section 3(k) principles – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part 2

While Part 1 of the Ericsson vs. Lava post series covered the summary of the court's judgement, this post discusses the principles reiterated by the Court recently in the Ericsson vs. Lava case, for analyzing inventions in the context of Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970. Lava filed a counterclaim against Ericsson’s patents in which Lava challenged that the inventions claimed by Ericsson fell under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970. In particular, Lava had pleaded in its…

April 12, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 618Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

Learn how a system for concealing user addresses in online transactions was deemed patentable, distinguishing it from excluded “business methods.” Gain insights for navigating patent applications in the digital age. Continue Reading Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

February 26, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 372Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Image accompanying blogpost on "Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High Court"

Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High Court

Madras High Court overturned patent refusal for “Image Construction Apparatus” due to insufficient reasoning from the Controller regarding inventive step and Section 3(k). The Court criticized failure to consider the fact that the European Patent Office (EPO) had granted a patent based on the same prior art references and the disregard to analyze technical aspects per Section 3(k). Continue Reading Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High…

February 17, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 665Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Featured image reads Patents, as the post is about patent infringement. To read the post click here.

New Computer Related Inventions Guidelines

The Indian Patent Office, after extensive consultative process, has issued an Order by which Chapter 08.03.05.10 of the Manual of Patent Office Practice and Procedure (MPPP), containing provisions pertaining to section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970, will stand deleted and replaced by the provisions of the new Guidelines, for examination of Computer Related Inventions (CRIs), with immediate effect. The Guidelines, while outlining the legal provisions related to CRIs, extensively demonstrates what ‘Patentable Subject Matter’ means and what parameters are…

August 27, 2015 BananaIP Reporter Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 791Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

Computer Programs with Technical Effect such as enhancing speed and efficiency are patentable, reiterates the Delhi High Court

Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

A Deep Dive into Section 3(k) Analysis of Ericsson’s Eight Patents – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part VII

Section 3(k) principles – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part 2

Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

Refusal of Patent for “Image Construction Apparatus” based on Section 3(k) and Inventive Step set aside by the Madras High Court

Connect with Us

BananaIP has been acknowledged as a women-owned enterprise, certified by WEConnect International.

Connect with us