Negative Definitions of "Contribution" / "Invention"

The simplest form to put forward the needed clarification would be "An improvement in data processing efficiency is not a technical contribution". Possibly in finding a compromise amendment between Ortega and Kudrycka et al, this can still be achieved. It is a bit unfortunate if the principle has to be limited to either "solutions to technical problems" or "data processing solutions". Rather it should apply to all solutions. Moreover, although the term "invention" can and should be treated as a synonym of "technical contribution", in case anyone wants to make a distinction between the two, it should be clear that this provision is about limiting the "contribution", which is the more unequivocal term.

no.	submitted by	vote	critique
98	Ortega	-	this does not exclude anything: the argument for contribution of programs and business methods will always be that they make something faster or more efficient than before, not that they use known data processing equipment. The latter will always lack novelty and inventive step anyway.
111 112 113	Kudrycka, Zwiefka; Bertinotti; Kauppi	++	These amendments codify both UK case law (Gale's application) and Germany's case law (German High Patent Court's ruling in the Error Search case). As the German court found: if an improvement of efficiency in the use of computing resources, such as time or data space, is deemed to be a technical contribution, then all computer-implemented business methods become patentable.
115	Ortega	++

Amendment 98

submitted by:

Manuel Medina Ortega

provision:

art 4 par 2

topic:

Negative Definitions of "Contribution" / "Invention"

recommendation:

-

amendment
A computer-implemented invention shall not be regarded as making a technical contribution merely because it involves the use of a computer, network or other programmable apparatus. Accordingly, inventions involving computer programs, whether expressed as source code, as object code or in any other form, which implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program and the computer, network or other programmable apparatus in which it is run shall not be patentable.	No se considerará que una innovación asistida por ordenador aporta una contribución técnica meramente porque implique el uso de un ordenador, red u otro aparato programable.
justification
Ver justificación de la enmienda al artículo 4 apartado 1 de Manuel Medina Ortega.

Critique

this does not exclude anything: the argument for contribution of programs and business methods will always be that they make something faster or more efficient than before, not that they use known data processing equipment. The latter will always lack novelty and inventive step anyway.

Amendment 111

submitted by:

Barbara Kudrycka, Tadeusz Zwiefka

provision:

art 4 par 2 a nov

language:

English

topic:

Negative Definitions of "Contribution" / "Invention"

recommendation:

++

amendment
	Member States shall ensure that data processing solutions are not considered to be patentable inventions merely because they improve efficiency in the use of resources within data processing systems.
justification
Nobody ever writes software without trying to optimise the use of computing resources. This amendment makes sure that this fact does not justify the granting of a patent. This codifies both UK case law (Gale's application) and Germany’s case law (BpatG’s ruling in the Error Search case). As the German court found: if an improvement of efficiency in the use of computing ressources, such as time or data space, is deemed to be a technical contribution, then all computer-implemented business methods become patentable. This amendment corresponds to article 6 in the consolidated text of the EP’s first reading, except that

Critique

These amendments codify both UK case law (Gale's application) and Germany's case law (German High Patent Court's ruling in the Error Search case). As the German court found: if an improvement of efficiency in the use of computing resources, such as time or data space, is deemed to be a technical contribution, then all computer-implemented business methods become patentable.

Amendment 112

submitted by:

Fausto Bertinotti

provision:

art 4 par 2 a nov

language:

English

topic:

Negative Definitions of "Contribution" / "Invention"

recommendation:

++

amendment
	Member States shall ensure that data processing solutions are not considered to be patentable inventions merely because they improve efficiency in the use of resources within data processing systems.
justification
Nobody ever writes software without trying to optimise the use of computing resources. This amendment makes sure that this fact does not justify the granting of a patent. This codifies both UK case law (Gale's application) and Germany’s case law (BpatG’s ruling in the Error Search case). As the German court found: if an improvement of efficiency in the use of computing ressources, such as time or data space, is deemed to be a technical contribution, then all computer-implemented business methods become patentable. This amendment corresponds to article 6 in the consolidated text of the EP’s first reading, except that

Critique

These amendments codify both UK case law (Gale's application) and Germany's case law (German High Patent Court's ruling in the Error Search case). As the German court found: if an improvement of efficiency in the use of computing resources, such as time or data space, is deemed to be a technical contribution, then all computer-implemented business methods become patentable.

Amendment 113

submitted by:

Piia-Noora Kauppi

provision:

art 4 par 2 a nov

language:

English

topic:

Negative Definitions of "Contribution" / "Invention"

recommendation:

++

amendment
	Member States shall ensure that data processing solutions are not considered to be patentable inventions merely because they improve efficiency in the use of resources within data processing systems.
justification
Self-explanatory.

Critique

These amendments codify both UK case law (Gale's application) and Germany's case law (German High Patent Court's ruling in the Error Search case). As the German court found: if an improvement of efficiency in the use of computing resources, such as time or data space, is deemed to be a technical contribution, then all computer-implemented business methods become patentable.

Amendment 114

submitted by:

Manuel Medina Ortega

provision:

art 4 bis nov

topic:

Negative Definitions of "Technical" and "Field of Technology"

amendment
	Los Estados miembros garantizarán que el procesamiento de datos no se considere un ámbito de tecnología en el sentido del derecho de patentes y que las innovaciones en el ámbito del procesamiento de datos tampoco se considere invenciones en el sentido del derecho de patentes.
justification
Se garantiza el cumplimiento del ADPIC asegurándose que los programas informáticos no pertenezcan al ámbito de la tecnología. Obsérvese que esto no excluye a los dispositivos utilizados para el procesamiento de los datos de la patentabilidad. Un ordenador puede solamente llevar a cabo dicho procesamiento, pero crear una nueva clase de ordenadores es un progreso en la ingeniería electrónica y no en el procesamiento de datos.

Amendment 115

submitted by:

Manuel Medina Ortega

provision:

art 4 ter nov

topic:

Negative Definitions of "Contribution" / "Invention"

amendment
	Los Estados miembros garantizarán que las soluciones a los problemas técnicos aplicadas a través de ordenador no sean consideradas como invenciones patentables cuando solamente mejoren la eficacia en el uso de recursos en los sistemas de procesamiento de datos.
justification
Se garantiza que hacer que un programa funcione con mayor rapidez o que use menos memoria no pueda ser utilizado como justificación para conceder una patente. Esta enmienda corresponde al artículo 6 del texto consolidado en primera lectura del PE.