After Some Dangerous Wavering, Indian Patent Office Gives Definitive 'No' To Software Patents

from the who's-next? dept

Wed, Mar 2nd 2016 3:29am — Glyn Moody

As Techdirt has reported over the years, views on whether software should be patentable, and if so, to what extent, have ebbed and flowed. In the US, the Supreme Court's decision in Alice v. CLS Bank seems to have established that most software isn't patentable. In the EU, the fate of software patents is less clear. According to the European Patent Convention, patents are not available for computer programs "as such" -- but that metaphysical "as such" rider has allowed thousands of software patents to be issued anyway. Muddying the waters further is the Unified Patent Court, which may or may not come into existence soon, with almost unchecked powers to reshape the patent landscape in Europe.

In India, by contrast, the situation regarding software patents has just been clarified, and in a rather dramatic manner. An informative press release from India's Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC.in) explains that last August the Indian Patent Office published some Guidelines for Computer Related Inventions (CRIs), which would have opened the floodgates to software patents. In response:

SFLC.in along with iSPIRT (Indian Software Product Industry Round Table) and Knowledge Commons led a group of civil society organisations, academicians and start-ups in writing a joint letter to the Prime Minister’s Office, the concerned ministries and the Patent Office requesting to recall the Guidelines.

Remarkably, things were put on hold: The [Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks], after listening to the views expressed by SFLC.in and Knowledge Commons at a meeting held on October 21, 2015, issued an order dated December 14, 2015 keeping the guidelines in abeyance. The Controller then held a public consultation at the patent office in Mumbai on January 19, 2016.
Even more remarkably, the Indian patent office went on to accept a three-part test suggested by SFLC.in to determine the patentability of CRIs, which is as follows: (1) openly construe the claim and identify the actual contribution;

(2) If the contribution lies only in mathematical method, business method or algorithm, deny the claim;

(3) If the contribution lies in the field of computer programme, check whether it is claimed in conjunction with a novel hardware and proceed to other steps to determine patentability with respect to the invention.. The computer programme in itself is never patentable. If the contribution lies solely in the computer programme, deny the claim. If the contribution lies in both the computer programme as well as hardware, proceed to other steps of patentability.
The key part is the last of these, which specifies that the "computer programme in itself is never patentable." As the SFLC.in press release points out, this welcome decision comes hard on the heels of the strong net neutrality rules issued in India recently. This decisive action in two quite different fields suggests the Indian government is consciously trying to place itself in the hi-tech vanguard, presumably with a view to encouraging domestic start-ups.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: india, patents, software patents

11 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

DocGerbil100 (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 3:55am

They actually called their group "iSPIRT"? What, were the names "iWANK" and "iSPOOGE" already taken?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MadAsASnake (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 4:26am

Contrast that to the current US approach - where they would rather protect the incumbents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 4:28am
  
  Re:
  They outsourced sanity and innovation to Indian workers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DannyB (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 6:10am
    
    Re: Re:
    The US may have outsourced the engineering and innovation talent. But at least we kept the management in the US.
    
    One day the indian workers will recognize that they don't need US management. (if they haven't already)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Wendy Cockcroft, 2 Mar 2016 @ 7:31am
      
      Tell Johnny the Indians are coming
      The wheel turns. Remember when Europe was drowning in a sea of incumbent protectionism that the US and Germany refused to be part of? Result: their fledgling economies took off because they weren't beholden to protectionist rent-seekers.
      
      By casting off the shackles of innovation protectionist regulations* India has maneuvered itself into an advantageous position. Move over Japan, shift a bit, Taiwan, excuse me China, tell Johnny the Indians are coming.
      
      *Did you see what I did there? :-P
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - DannyB (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 9:58am
        
        Re: Tell Johnny the Indians are coming
        Did you confuse people from India with the western mislabeling people with the word "indian" because someone who 'discovered' land that was already here, was confused about where he was?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
DannyB (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 6:09am

US Legislators !! Wake up!! Do something!!
Quick! Patent India's idea of not allowing software patents and then sue them for patent infringement! Investor state dispute. Ditto for business method patents! Don't license this patent to anyone in order to prevent any nation from forbidding software patents. And similarly patent the forbidding of a business method patent. Maybe more generally a patent to cover passing legislation that disfavors a business that is or would like to be making money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AvikSarkar (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 6:28am

Patenting software
I completely agree with DannyB.. Indians, in no way, need help from US management
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wyrm (profile), 2 Mar 2016 @ 9:00am

Funny, I think this paragraph (3) was what Europe intended with that infamous "computer programs as such". However, not being clear enough turned it into a huge loophole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Justin, 2 Mar 2016 @ 2:32pm

Software patents
The indian position goes to far. in the US and Australia, software is patented provided that it solves a technological problem. This is a better balance, I think. See for example http://softwarepatentsconsidered.blogspot.com.au
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 3 Mar 2016 @ 8:30am
  
  Re: Software patents
  Oh, you really don't want to follow the US' example with software patents. They do far, far more harm than good here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]