Patenting computer programs or business methods in Australia

At the end of August, Middleton J overturned the Commissioner’s refusal to grant an innovation patent for RPL’s computerised method entitled ‘Method and System for Automated Collection of Evidence of Skills and Knowledge’. Instead, his Honour held that the method was a manner of manufacture and, novelty and inventive step having been satisfied, patentable. What […]

Business method patents: Federal Court retreating?

Emmett J has dismissed Research Associates’ appeal from the Commissioner’s rejection of an attempt to patent a method for calculating an Index for using in financial investing. Claim 1 was for: A computer-implemented method for generating an index, the method including steps of: (a) accessing data relating to a plurality of assets; (b) processing the […]

Mayo v Prometheus

Last week, the US Supreme Court unanimously rejected the patentability of Prometheus’ “diagnostic”, characterising it as an impermissible attempt to patent a law of nature. Claim 1 of the Patent was: A method of optimizing therapeutic efficacy for treatment of an immune-mediated gastrointestinal disorder, comprising: “(a) administering a drug providing 6-thioguanine to a subject having […]

Patentable subject matter in Australia

The Minister has released ACIP’s report into what should be patentable subject matter under Australian law. At the moment, s 18 defines a ‘patentable invention’ and the Dictionary in Sch. 1 defines and “invention” as: “invention” means any manner of new manufacture the subject of letters patent and grant of privilege within section 6 of […]

Patentable Subject Matter: ACIP options paper

ACIP has published an Options Paper in connection with its review of “patentable subject matter”. Press release here. Options Paper here. The options under consideration are too far reaching for a “sound bite”. For example (from the Press Release) “The test for patentable subject matter in Australia is linked to legislation introduced in England in […]