Can I Patent Software?

With the emergence of cloud computing, the market for cloud-based applications is expected to grow at an exponential rate. As a result, Software as a Service (SaaS) companies are doing all they can to protect their valuable intellectual property. 

What is patentable in software? In a nutshell, the software to be protected should be useful, novel, and useful in some way. For instance, if it improves computer performance or increase the accuracy of processing, it can be patentable, subject to the novelty and non-obviousness considerations.

There are specific requirements for software that may be eligible for a patent. In this article, we will explore Examples of patent-eligible software and the Legal test to determine whether or not your software qualifies for a patent. If you think your software may qualify for a patent, read on to learn more about the requirements and apply for a patent. We hope you find this article helpful.

Background

A computer software license is given on a set of instructions (or, more precisely, codes, procedures, and routines). Many industries have benefited from the use of software systems, which may not be patentable. Software patents cover a variety of computer-related inventions, including code, libraries, algorithms, and user interfaces. One of the first software patents was granted on 17th August 1966 and was called “Computer Arranged For Automatic Solution of Linear Programming Problems.”

The term “computer” means a programmable machine that executes instructions. Computers are often physical devices with one or more processors and memory units, as well as auxiliary devices that communicate with the computer and perform specific tasks. In some cases, a computer may be distributed and comprise a communication network that allows people to use the same system for a wide variety of tasks. If this is the case, software may be patented and may be used to create new products and services.

When developing a computer program, many people are curious as to what is patentable software. While software is often used in everyday life, a new invention can qualify as a patentable idea if it improves computing performance, reduces the computing resources needed to complete a task, or solves a problem in a unique way. These ideas qualify for patent protection, as long as they do not preempt every application of the idea.

Inventions in the field of computer software can qualify as patentable if they solve a problem that is “necessarily rooted” in computer technology. However, a patent is not possible if the invention does not solve the problem in an unconventional way or contain claims that preempt every possible application of the idea. Here are some tips to consider when patenting your idea.

In order to be patentable, software must address a specific computing challenge and improve the functioning of the computer in some way. The technology must be new, useful, and non-obvious. The problem solving aspect of the software is the most crucial to its patentability.

A software patent protects the core of your software on the desktop or the cloud, such as a computer program, user interface, or library. This article will discuss the process for obtaining a software patent and what kinds of ideas qualify. In this article, I will discuss abstract ideas, using algorithms to achieve a tangible result, and show how the software improves performance in terms of speed or quality of output in a novel way.

Why do some people feel that software should not be patentable?

Controversy about legal status of software patents

Many software developers benefit from open-source software and feel that patenting software is wrong because it restricts their freedom to code.  End Software Patents is an organization that believes software shouldn’t be patentable for the following reasons:

• Software patents can make it difficult for to be standardized across different devices such as smartphones and computers. This can lead to compatibility issues.
• Patents can discourage and even prevent people from creating software.
• Software patents pose a risk for companies. They could be fined if they infringe on a patent, making small businesses to avoid creating new invention because of this danger. The industry is dominated by a few companies.

However, facts point away from these arguments. In particular, the FAANG’s dominance of patent grants (they are all in the top 20 patentees every year) does not mean that these companies like patents.  Just look at the Phhhoto v Meta case and you will see how start-up software companies without patent protection are exploited by big companies.

Software patents are seen as a threat for innovation. Because new programs often depend on older, patent-pending programs for their success  and some developers fear that they may be prevented from using their skills because of patents. A smartphone developer might be prevented from creating a particular type of menu by a competitor who holds the patent to window’s menu technology, for example.

On the legal side, despite their widespread availability, patents for software are not as easy to obtain as other types of inventions. The legal status of software patents has remained controversial for years. A number of Supreme Court rulings in the 1970s and 1980s suggested that software could not be protected by patents. However, subsequent court decisions expressly allowed software patents, resulting in numerous software patents being granted. However, Alice, a recent case by the US Supreme Court, signaled a new skepticism regarding software patents. In Alice, the Supreme Court established a two-part test to determine whether a piece or software is patentable:

1. Are the claims in dispute directed at an abstract idea?
2. Are the claims sufficiently inventive to transform the claimed abstract idea into patent-eligible applications?

If the patent application focuses on a generic process, such as data collection, automation, analysis, and display, it will not meet the patent eligibility requirements. It will be rejected under 35 U.S.C. Section 101.

Examples of patent-eligible software

If you are interested in a software patent, you may be wondering: can you patent software code? This article will address the criteria needed to secure a patent for your code. The criteria include non-obviousness and an Inventive step. We will also discuss whether you can patent software that works in an industry where there is a high level of competition. Continue reading to learn more! Here are some examples of software that could be a candidate for a patent: virus detection software, web interfaces, content-filtering software, video compression software, and more.

The first step to determining if software inventions are patent-eligible is evaluating whether the inventions are new and have a technical effect. Patentable software inventions may include algorithms or calculation models that perform specific tasks on a computer. In addition, the invention must contain all of the necessary technical features to enable its claimed benefits. For further guidance, see the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)’s Subject Matter Eligibility website.

Another important step in patent eligibility is to ensure that the invention does not include a generic version of an existing product. A generic software application may contain a computer program that can do the work of two different products. Patent eligibility depends on the specific implementation of the software. Some examples of patent-eligible software are:

A common case in which software is patent-eligible is software that increases a computer’s speed, capacity, or security. This is because it has a significant functional benefit and can affect the way people live their lives. In contrast, a software program that merely adds functionality to a known product does not fall under the ‘abstract idea’ requirement. However, the USPTO does not routinely reject applications that seek to patent software that implements an abstract idea. A similar case, Bilski v. CLS Bank International, et al., considered an abstract idea that was added to an existing product using a computer.

The second issue in software patent eligibility is the use of abstract ideas. Patents for software that includes an algorithm that converts binary-coded decimal numbers to pure binary numbers is not eligible for a patent. Nevertheless, the USPTO has recently provided clear guidance on this issue in previous cases. In BASCOM v. AT&T, the USPTO said that software claims relating to computer programs are patent-eligible. The USPTO’s decision makes clear that a computer program may be patent-eligible, but a mere recitation does not qualify as an invention.

A recent patent in the field of cloud computing describes the process of updating an accommodation listing in a reservation system and its software model for determining whether it is likely to be booked. Airbnb uses a predictive computer model to determine which listings are most likely to be booked. This patent will allow Airbnb to improve its algorithms.

Before filing a patent application for software, developers should consult with a patent attorney. It is important to find an attorney with experience in software patents. Identify the features of the software that you wish to patent. Discuss with the attorney the changes that are required to meet the patent eligibility requirements. Then, discuss whether these features and improvements are enough to warrant a patent application. If you’re unsure about the patentability of the software, consult with an experienced patent attorney who can review the features to decide if the features are sufficient for a patent application.

patent can be filed for a computer program, an improved format or layout of data, or the graphic interaction with a computer program. Patentable software must meet certain legal requirements to be eligible for the protection of a software invention. Listed below are some examples of software that may qualify for patent protection. This article discusses some of the most common software patent applications. There are many more categories that software developers should be aware of.

2. Graphical interaction with a computer program

The PTO’s examination process for design patents is not limited to patentability. In some instances, a design patent can claim novel design elements, but its practical use is not a good analogy. The courts are essentially gatekeepers to protect social welfare. Although the analogy is not universal, it is applicable to some design patents. For example, design protection is similar to copyright protection of graphical user interfaces, functionality, and infringement.

The patentability of GUIs is a balancing act. Since a computer program is a materialization of software, it is unlikely to be a movable article. However, a design patent can protect a user interface’s design, but not the surface ornamentation. The resulting distinction between function and expression is not a clear one. Further, designers should consider the broader scope of a design patent before pursuing it.

3. Using conventional components in an unconventional way

The Supreme Court recently ruled that certain software is not patentable, but certain claims may be. To qualify, however, a claim must be directed to a method, system, or computer component that is unconventional. Although these components may be conventional, there can be a technical improvement to the computer’s performance. The court has made this distinction clear in a number of recent decisions. Here are the main factors to consider before submitting a software patent application.

4. Improved format or layout of data

Software patents are a popular form of intellectual property protection. Among the goals of software patents are to create and distribute new programs and data formats that improve the user experience. Patenting these improvements is difficult because of the vast amount of competing software. However, software patents can be effective in achieving these goals. If the improved disk formatting results in improved computer performance, the software technology is patent eligible under established case law.

Examples of patent-ineligible abstract ideas

In the seminal case of Alice v CLS Bank Int’l, the US Supreme Court listed the following topics as not eligible for patent protection when the idea is claimed broadly “without more.”  Alice Corp.’s patent application was not eligible according to the Supreme Court because the company had simply taken an abstract idea and programmed it to run on a computer. One major policy consideration behind such patent ineligibility decision is that the Courts do not want claims that pre-empt the field so that no-one else can work in the appce.

1. Mathematical concepts

The grouping of mathematical concepts is made up of mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas and equations, as well as mathematical calculations.

These “mathematical concept” were identified by the Court as judicial exceptions because a mathematical formula  as such is not protected under our patent laws. Therefore, ”the discovery of a mathematical formula cannot be used to support a patent unless some other inventive concept is included in its application.

2. Certain methods of organizing human activity

These fundamental economic principles and practices they include hedging, insurance, mitigating risks; commercial or legal interactions (including contracts; legal obligations); advertising, marketing, sales activities or behavior; business relations; managing personal behavior or relationships between people (including teaching, social activities, and following any rules or instructions).

3. Mental Process

A mental process (thinking) which “can be performed by the human mind or by a person using a pen & paper” is considered abstract idea by the courts. According to the Federal Circuit, “methods that can be performed mentally or are equivalent to human mental work are not patentable abstract ideas. They are the ‘basic tools for scientific and technological work’ that are available to everyone.

An abstract idea can be patented if it improves the capabilities of a computer. If it is a software application, then it must satisfy the Alice test and be able to be used to control and condition access to data. If it is not, it cannot be patented. An abstract idea can be a business idea, which would place the idea under the Alice test when your invention is reviewed at the USPTO and by the courts.

The Alice test requires a detailed analysis of the claims made in the patent.  We will show you how to transform abstract ideas into patentable subject matter next.

Obtaining a software patent in the United States

The software industry is booming. It is extremely flexible and has huge innovation potential. Software engineers can create new technical capabilities, fix bugs, and release new software with simple downloadable updates. Software patents are rare because they mainly protect mathematics, rather than actual software. Copyright and trade secrets provide substantial IP protection for software.

Obtaining a software patent in the US is similar to obtaining a patent for any other type of US invention. Patent claims must be definite, novel, and non-obvious, and the specification must describe the claimed subject matter in sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art could practice it.

When the patent office examiner reviews a software patent application, she may first determine whether the claimed subject matter is patentable using tests based on the Alice case. Then the examiner applies other criteria for determining whether software is patentable include the following: novelty, non-obviousness, definiteness, and usefulness. Moreover, a software patent specification must disclose the claimed subject matter in such a way that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art could perform the same function. There are many factors to consider when drafting a software patent application, and it is helpful to seek professional help.

The next step is to carefully define the invention. A software patent application may be more challenging to prepare and file due to Alice and 101 facotrs. But it can be possible to get approval for your software invention if it solves a performance challenge in a novel way. A software patent application should be carefully written to address these issues and to protect the invention. You can also apply for a software patent if you developed software that speeds up processes, uses less resources, or reduces the need for humans to carry out the task.

While the process of obtaining a software patent in the United States is complicated, the benefits are worth it. Software patents protect software programs and algorithms, and they can help protect concepts and ideas related to these programs. The first step is to draft an application that outlines the technical benefits of the claimed software. You should flush out Section 112 concens by providing details on the algorithm or flowchart.

The laws regarding patents, trademarks, and copyrights are incredibly complex. They are the result of centuries-old traditions and codes. The U.S. Patent Act of 1970 is the first patent statute, and the O’Reilly v. Morse case established that an abstract idea can be patented if it is used in a specific way. The Gorham Company v. White decision, on the other hand, created a foundation for tests pertaining to design patent infringement.

Due to the IP maze, it is vital to choose a qualified attorney. A qualified lawyer can guide you through the entire process, and they can be invaluable in the initial phases of drafting a patent application. Claims, which describe specific parts of software, are critical to the patent application process. Working with an attorney can help minimize the risk of rejection by the USPTO. While it is not impossible to draft the patent application without an attorney, working with a lawyer is always a good idea.

Software Patent-eligibility Factors

The process begins by determining whether the claimed invention is directed toward an abstract idea. Examples of abstract ideas are fundamental economic practices, methods of organizing human activities, mathematical ideas, and ideas themselves. Most business method software inventions fall into this category. The second step examines whether the claimed invention limits implementation of an abstract idea using a specific technology, or if it is a technical improvement on another technology. The third step determines whether the invention enhances the function of the computer.

A computer program that merely does something that is well-known on a computer is unlikely to be patented. However, software that improves the functionality of a computer or reduces the number of computers necessary for a specific task may be patented.  For example, software that controls a pump, for example, may be patentable the software improves the performance of the pump somehow. In another case, a patent court held that a patent for filtering internet content was valid despite the fact that the traditional method was to install the filtering software onto the end-user’s terminal. The patentees sought to patent a remote filtering tool that could be installed without installing the software onto the end-user’s device.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has not yet fashioned an additional legal test for patent eligibility on software. However, it has issued Interim Guidance (2014) that asks whether a patent claim is directed to a natural phenomenon or law of nature, and if it has “significant elements.”  The USPTO has also applied the “computer operation test” to reject claims that simply recite running a generic concept on a generic computer “without more.”

If the product solves a problem “necessarily rooted in computer technology,” it may be eligible for a software patent. In either case, software should have claims that do not preempt every application of the solution. But software patents are a complex decision for company leaders. A little knowledge never hurts! The Forbes Business Council offers free resources to help business owners and entrepreneurs assess the pros and cons of securing a software patent.

Software Novelty Factors

A patent’s novelty is measured by whether the invention is new in some way or has been available to the public. The test of novelty is very difficult to reconcile with the notion of meaningful coverage. Many inventions do not meet the threshold of novelty, so patent holders must prove that they are innovative in order to be granted a patent.

As with other technologies, determining the novelty of a software invention is a delicate balancing act. Software patents are often of low quality, granting only basic protection for mathematical expressions. However, software has permeated every aspect of technology and economic endeavor, and courts have justified their granting. The assessment of novelty involves identifying the field of technology, establishing common general knowledge, and demonstrating utility.

A patent application must include an element of novelty in order to be valid. The novelty test is based on the idea or invention’s utility and cannot cover a method that is already known to the public. To show the invention is not novel in view of a prior art reference, the reference must show each and every element in the claimed invention. A claimed invention may be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 when the invention is anticipated (or is “not novel”) over a disclosure that is available as prior art. To reject a claim as not novel by a single reference, the disclosure must teach every element required by the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation. See, e.g., MPEP § 2114, subsections II and IV. “A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference.” Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987). “When a claim covers several structures or compositions, either generically or as alternatives, the claim is deemed anticipated if any of the structures or compositions within the scope of the claim is known in the prior art.” Brown v. 3M, 265 F.3d 1349, 1351, 60 USPQ2d 1375, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (claim to a system for setting a computer clock to an offset time to address the Year 2000 (Y2K) problem, applicable to records with year date data in “at least one of two-digit, three-digit, or four-digit” representations, was held anticipated by a system that offsets year dates in only two-digit formats)

Software Non-obviousness Factors

In addition to having novelty, patents for software must also be non-obvious. It must be new and useful beyond what a person of ordinary skill in the art already knows. A person of ordinary skill in the art cannot come up with a similar solution to a problem. The patent must also demonstrate inventiveness beyond the ordinary level of that art.In KSR v. Teleflex , the Supreme Court provided guidelines for what constitutes an obvious invention. The Supreme Court’s flexible approach to the obviousness inquiry is reflected in numerous pre-KSR decisions. MPEP 2144 provides multiple lines of reasoning that support the obviousness determination, including the use of common sense and ordinary practices. This type of reasoning is sanctioned by the KSR opinion that follows the Graham v. John Deere Co. decision.

To be deemed non-obvious, a new and useful invention must have a sufficient difference from the prior art to be genuinely novel. The term “non-obvious” refers to a substantial difference between the invention and what a person of ordinary skill could have known without reference to the prior art. An example of an obvious invention is a common method of sorting data.  Merely substituting one method (bubble sort) with Quicksort would be obvious, for example.

Since the patent office can stack 4-5 patents to reconstruct your invention using hindsight by reading your application, one natural question is how to handle such obviousness rejection.  You can rebut the rejection by arguing that the references themselves point away from the suggestion to combine if there are languages in the reference(s) that disclaims such combination.  You can also follow the examiner’s invitation to combine the reference to see if the combined system would work as intended.  For example, if A+B doesn’t work as the examiner predicted or hypothesized, this may be a strong rebuttal of the obviousness rejection. In this case, the patent office must look elsewhere to argue obviousness of the invention, even if this doesn’t constitute a significant part of its claims. A patent that is clearly and concisely states the Office’s findings and conclusions of fact will lead to an expedient resolution of obviousness issues.

Patent examiners ask whether the claimed invention would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the plaintiff’s invention. While the obviousness inquiry may seem easy, it is actually a complex and fact-based process. In order to be patentable, an inventor must show that his or her invention is not obvious and is not fundamentally different from the prior art. An inventor must demonstrate that a patent application is inventive beyond the ordinary skill of others in the same field.

If you’re looking to patent software code, there are several aspects to consider, including non-obviousness. This requirement applies to any software invention and is highly subjective. A skilled patent attorney can provide guidance on whether a certain piece of software is novel and not obvious.

Best practices for obtaining a software patent

Software patents are important commercial assets and powerful tools. Patents protect your intellectual property and make you a desirable investment target. A published patent portfolio will deter or slow potential competitors from entering the market. It will also make your business more valuable to prospective investors and strategic acquirers. The advantages of having a patent portfolio are numerous.

Examples of software that could be a candidate for a patent: artificial intelligence software, medical software, virus detection software, web interfaces, content-filtering software, video compression software, and more.

If you are interested in a software patent, you may be wondering: can I be an inventor and patent my Unicorn software code? We will next provide tips on how to handles the criteria needed to secure a patent for your code. The criteria include non-obviousness and an Inventive step. We will also discuss whether you can patent software that works in an industry where there is a high level of competition.

Do Research

Before applying for a software patent, you should conduct a  patent search to discover similar software technology. A patent search will allow you to see if your software is unique enough to warrant a patent application.  The USPTO Patent Full-Text and Image Database is a good place to find potential prior art in your search.

You can use your prior art search and write your description to highlight what makes your software unique. If you focus on the unique features of your code, you can get broad protection if you cover the white space as guided by the results of the patent search you did earlier.  Conversely, if you did not perform the prior art search and write without guidance, you may accidentally focus your writing on areas where there are numerous patents teaching your techniques, then it’s unlikely that your application will receive broad protection, which makes the process not worthwhile.  

In order for software to be patentable, it must be new and improve on a well-known mechanism. Simply doing something known on a computer is not patentable, and software needs to have some added features to make it unique. The Supreme Court has provided little guidance on what constitutes an “abstract idea” and what additional elements need to be included in an application to transform it into a patented invention. The two-step process discussed below lays out the criteria for determining whether a software program is patentable.

Software is not a tangible object, and therefore, a patent cannot claim benefits to a customer. The process itself must be unique. It must also be technical, and cannot be described by another person. This means that software needs to be different from the rest of the market. A software patent may only be granted to a software developer. This means that software must be new and unrivaled by other products in the same category.

There are many ways to make software patentable. One way to do this is to conduct a patent search on the subject of your invention. By performing a search, you can identify which aspects of your software are unique, and which aspects you can expand on to include additional features. Additionally, you can find out whether your claim is sufficiently broad. This step will help you determine whether your application qualifies for patenting. If it is, it will be granted by the European Patent Office.

To ensure your invention is unique, you must first ensure that it is both novel and functionally unique. This means that it can’t be an exact copy of a previously-disclosed design. Furthermore, software patents must not be obvious to consumers. If you want your software to be patentable, you should make sure that it is novel and does not have an obvious similarity with other products. Once you have identified this, you can then decide whether it is unique or not.

As patenting software is a long and tricky process and can take years, a good search will give you the confidence that patenting is well worth the effort. Patent research can be complicated. It is important to work with your lawyer throughout the process. You should receive a comprehensive report on any patents that might be relevant to your invention at the end of your search. This information will help you complete your patent application.

Define your Software Innovation

You should be able to document the overall design of your invention down to the last detail. This will allow you and your patent attorney to get the best protection for your software. These are some questions you might ask.

• What’s unique about my software?
• What function is my software supposed to perform?
• How does software handle information?
• How does the user interface look?
• What problems can my software solve?
• Which parts of my program should I patent?

You will need to look at your invention from multiple perspectives when you file an application. It will be necessary to view it from both the point of view of an end-user and a computer. It should also be viewed from an architectural, systematic perspective. The software patent application must first describe the overall computer architecture. It must also contain one flow chart for the overall working of the software. The application must also include flow charts for the various routines and subroutines

Software patents cover standalone computer programs, mobile apps, and software that is embedded into a machine. Patent protection is governed by the following criteria:

• The subject matter must be patentable.
• The invention should be industrial in nature.
• Patentable ideas must be original and not existing. It is important and significant to consider the difference claimed between an existing item and the innovation.

The process begins by determining whether the claimed invention is directed toward ineligible subject matter such as pure math or an abstract idea. Examples of abstract ideas are fundamental economic practices, methods of organizing human activities, mathematical ideas, and ideas themselves. The second step examines whether the claimed invention is directed at a specific technology and not overarching concepts that pre-empt others from the whole space, or if it is a technical improvement on another technology. The third step determines whether the invention enhances the function of the computer.

Another important factor in deciding whether software is patentable is whether or not it is “necessarily rooted” in computer technology. In other words, the software should solve a problem that is not “necessarily rooted” in computer technology, and it should have claims that don’t preempt every possible application of the idea. There are many cases where software is considered an abstract idea.

In order to obtain a patent on software, an applicant must first demonstrate that the claimed invention is novel and the details provided in the application can be implemented by a person of ordinary skill. The software must have a practical application.

As with any other patent, the technical details of a software invention are vital in determining whether or not it is patentable. The technical details of a software patent application should tie the claimed software to the specific technical benefits. Moreover, a software patent application must focus on the challenges that the software poses. However, it should not be a mere technical improvement that requires a patent. In general, software patents must advocate inventiveness and a computer program must be an important part of the invention.

Taking your code invention beyond the abstract

Generally, software patents must meet four criteria. First, the code must be patent eligible. Second, the claims must be novel, useful, and non-obvious. Third, the software must not have been previously published or known to skilled artesans. The fourth criteria is whether the software has a technical innovation that relates to the law of nature to take it out of the abstract idea realm.

Abstract ideas are the product of a mental process performed in the human mind. These mental processes include observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. In patent law, these concepts are referred to as mental processes. In an abstract idea patent application, it is necessary to prove that the invention is not merely a mental process; it must be based on practical use and application in the field, and showing that the abstract ideas result in improving machine performance is an escape hatch you can use to protect your invention.

To avoid the abstract bin, the patent application should provide a high level of technical description and focus on how the invention improves computer performance, either in speed or quality of output. Since the patent office is not interested in markeing puffery, the application should provide technical discussions that highlight the innovation’s functionality and originality.

There are two important principles for patenting software: first, you must provide improvements to the underlying mechanism of the system. A computer program that simply performs the known task of calculating an interest rate is unlikely to be patentable.

Second, software must be a technical improvement on the abstract idea behind the method. An invention may be patentable if it improves the functionality of computers or reduces the number of computers necessary to perform a given task.

A patent application must have a novel, inventive concept. The inventor must have created a patented process or product that would not have existed before filing the patent application. This step is not straightforward. There are a number of technical requirements and nuances to follow. The application must also meet the USPTO’s requirements. In addition, the patent applicant must have the ability to produce an exemplary product.

And finally, the patent applicant must demonstrate that the invention is valuable.

As with any other patent, the technical details of a software invention are vital in determining whether or not it is patentable. The technical details of a software patent application should tie the claimed software to the specific technical benefits. Moreover, a software patent application must focus on the challenges that the software poses. However, it should not be a mere technical improvement that requires a patent. In general, software patents must advocate inventiveness and a computer program must be an important part of the invention.

The Software Patent Application

A software invention does not require hardware outside of a computer. The software program itself causes the computer to work in a new way. If the software helps improve computer performance, this transformation makes the software implementation patentable. Likewise, the software that enables the computer to do something new may be patented subject matter.

According to the USPTO’s 37 CFR 1.51  General requisites of an application:

• (a) Applications for patents must be made to the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. An application transmittal letter limited to the transmittal of the documents and fees comprising a patent application under this section may be signed by a juristic applicant or patent owner.
• (b) A complete application filed under § 1.53(b) or § 1.53(d) comprises:
  • (1) A specification as prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 112, including a claim or claims, see §§ 1.71 to 1.77;
  • (2) The inventor’s oath or declaration, see §§ 1.63 and 1.64;
  • (3) Drawings, when necessary, see §§ 1.81 to 1.85; and
  • (4) The prescribed filing fee, search fee, examination fee, and application size fee, see § 1.16.
• (c) A complete provisional application filed under § 1.53(c) comprises:
  • (1) A cover sheet identifying:
    • (i) The application as a provisional application,
    • (ii) The name or names of the inventor or inventors, (see § 1.41(a)(2)),
    • (iii) The residence of each named inventor,
    • (iv) The title of the invention,
    • (v) The name and registration number of the attorney or agent (if applicable),
    • (vi) The docket number used by the person filing the application to identify the application (if applicable),
    • (vii) The correspondence address, and
    • (viii) The name of the U.S. Government agency and Government contract number (if the invention was made by an agency of the U.S. Government or under a contract with an agency of the U.S. Government);
  • (2) A specification as prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 112(a), see § 1.71;
  • (3) Drawings, when necessary, see §§ 1.81 to 1.85; and
  • (4) The prescribed filing fee and application size fee, see § 1.16.
• (d) Applicants are encouraged to file an information disclosure statement in nonprovisional applications. See § 1.97 and § 1.98. No information disclosure statement may be filed in a provisional application.

In addition, a software patent application should be adapted to show:

• Description of the system where your software operates
• A series of flowcharts or graphical illustration of how the invention operates and gives an overview of the software’s functionality.
• Claims with specificity on how your software will achieve its goal.

When considering whether an invention is patentable, it must meet certain requirements. These requirements include being patent eligible, useful, novel, non-obvious, and sufficiently described. Those criteria are discussed in the preceding section of this article. For software, these requirements must be met in order for an invention to be patentable and further, you will need to show the how it works with specifity to solve a technical problem.

Before filing a patent application for a new program component, it is crucial to understand the prerequisites for patentability of computer software

The abstract idea can be anything from mathematical relationships and formulas to fundamental economic practices. However, just because a program is described as an abstract idea does not mean it is unpatentable. Abstract ideas, for example, can be considered patentable if they solve a problem that is “necessarily rooted” in computer technology and it improves performance. However, these abstract ideas must solve a problem in a unique, unconventional way and contain patent claims that don’t preempt every possible application. Also, if the patent application has information on how it improves the performance of the computer (in speed or results of the output), these facts can help move the application into the allowance queue.

The first step to determining if software inventions are patent-eligible is evaluating whether the inventions are new and have a technical effect. Patentable software inventions may include algorithms or calculation models that perform specific tasks on a computer. In addition, the invention must contain all of the necessary technical features to enable its claimed benefits. For further guidance, see the USPTO’s Subject Matter Eligibility website.

Another important step in patent eligibility is to ensure that the invention does not include a generic version of an existing product. A generic software application may contain a computer program that can do the work of two different products. Patent eligibility depends on the specific implementation of the software. Some examples of patent-eligible software are:

A common case in which software is patent-eligible is software that increases a computer’s speed, capacity, or security. This is because it has a significant functional benefit and can affect the way people live their lives. In contrast, a software program that merely adds functionality to a known product does not fall under the ‘abstract idea’ requirement. However, the USPTO does not routinely reject applications that seek to patent software that implements an abstract idea. A similar case, Bilski v. CLS Bank International, et al., considered an abstract idea that was added to an existing product using a computer.

Before filing a patent application for software, developers should consult with a patent attorney. It is important to find an attorney with experience in software patents. Identify the features of the software that you wish to patent. Discuss with the attorney the changes that are required to meet the patent eligibility requirements. Then, discuss whether these features and improvements are enough to warrant a patent application. If you’re unsure about the patentability of the software, consult with an experienced patent attorney who can review the features to decide if the features are sufficient for a patent application.

Patentability of software depends on whether the application solves a problem “necessarily rooted” in computer technology. If it solves a problem in an unconventional way, it may qualify as an “abstract idea.” The claims must be narrow and avoid preempting every application of the idea. This is often the case with computer software. For more information on software patentability, read this article.

For software patentability to be granted, the invention must solve a challenging problem in a new way. It must be able to solve the problem while focusing on its technical underpinnings. Many developers discourage patenting software because it prevents new discoveries in computer ideas and innovation. However, software patents should break down an algorithm into a series of steps, and must describe how the algorithm solves a real-world problem.

The process must be “unique,” which means that it must be “not obvious” or “novel” to others. In addition, the process must be “tangible,” meaning that it must involve a machine. In other words, software must be a computer implementation and not merely a piece of code. If it meets these requirements, it will receive a patent. This is a vital distinction for software patentability.

Provide high level of technical detail

Patent eligibility requirements for computer software are different in the USPTO, EPO, and JPO. The USPTO has stricter requirements than the EPO, which are a bit ambiguous. If you want your computer software to be patented, use more technical terms and stay updated on recent precedents. The European requirements, on the other hand, are much more ambiguous and are largely interpreted by case law.

To avoid your computer-implemented invention being rejected substantively by the USPTO Examiner because it is too “abstract” in 35 U.S.C. Section 101. It is important to include both the technical difficulties others have faced prior to your invention as well as the inventive technical improvements made by your software in your claim. By doing so your ideas can be protected against being copied or used in the development of a competitor’s product. Although the code may not be patentable, it may still be possible to make the software as long as it passes the eligibility test as described on Alice test.

A critical component of a successful patent application is the level of technical detail in the specification. This section of the application must provide an explanation of the claimed function, which must be achieved through an algorithm. A software-related invention must also explain how the software interacts with claimed hardware. A failure to do so could render the patent claim invalid, because it lacks an adequate written description. Here are some tips to ensure that your specification is detailed enough to achieve this goal.

The Federal Circuit outlined a test for whether a written description is sufficient to enable patentability. This test looks for whether the disclosure of the application provides a “reasonably clear” explanation to a person skilled in the art. In the case of computer software, the Federal Circuit pointed out that this test does not apply if the specification simply describes how a claimed function is achieved. This is particularly true for inventions that use software as an input or output component.

First, the claims in the patent application for computer software should be modeled after claims that are already patent-eligible, or on examples provided by the US Patent and Trademark Office. Additionally, the claim should clearly demonstrate that the invention is not merely an “abstract idea” and is thus patent-eligible.

A critical component of a successful patent application is the level of technical detail in the specification. This section of the application must provide an explanation of the claimed function, which must be achieved through an algorithm. A software-related invention must also explain how the software interacts with claimed hardware. A failure to do so could render the patent claim invalid, because it lacks an adequate written description. Here are some tips to ensure that your specification is detailed enough to achieve this goal.

First, the claims in the patent application for computer software should be modeled after claims that are already patent-eligible, or on examples provided by the US Patent and Trademark Office. Additionally, the claim should clearly state that the invention is not merely an “abstract idea” and is thus patent-eligible. It is important to understand that the content of this document is not intended to be legal advice and should not be relied on without first seeking specialist legal advice.

The Federal Circuit outlined a test for whether a written description is sufficient to enable patentability. This test looks for whether the disclosure of the application provides a “reasonably clear” explanation to a person skilled in the art. In the case of computer software, the Federal Circuit pointed out that this test does not apply if the specification simply describes how a claimed function is achieved. This is particularly true for inventions that use software as an input or output component.

A software idea that is abstract in nature may qualify for patent protection if it solves a problem “necessarily rooted” in computer technology. But to qualify as patentable, the idea must solve the problem in an unconventional manner. And the claims must not preempt every application of the idea. The EPO Examiner concluded that the claimed invention was “abstract.”

The second step of the process for determining patentability in computer software is the requirement that computer-related patent applications contain elements that transform abstract ideas into actual inventions. However, there is no clear guidance in the Supreme Court on what constitutes an “abstract idea” and how much detailed detail is required to transform it into a patent-worthy design. Therefore, it’s important to provide detailed explanations of how the claimed invention works.

You should also expand on the text how your code fits into the exceptions that can transform a patent-eligible invention into a patent-ineligible one

Software as “machine or transformation”

The patentability of a method is determined by how closely it resembles the process claimed by an applicant. Many processes and abstract ideas, such as business methods, do not fall under the machine-or-transformation test. In the case of a software method, however, the process can be patented. Using a machine-or-transformation test to determine whether a method is patentable is an important step toward achieving patent protection for a new product.

A method claim can qualify for patent protection when the invention imposes a meaningful limitation on a specific field of use. The PTO has written a memorandum to examiners that explains that a mere field-of-use limitation is not enough. The PTO Guidance Memo explains that a machine or transformation must impose meaningful limitations on the scope of a method claim, although this definition is not clear.

The Bilski decision may have made the machine-or-transformation test both a necessary and sufficient condition for patent eligibility. This analysis seems to declare a claimed invention patent-eligible if it meets the machine-or-transformation test, although the Supreme Court has ruled in many cases that the machine-or-transformation test is not a dispositive factor.

The machine-or-transformation test has had several variations over the years. In 2008, it was used exclusively. However, since that time, the test has become less important. After that, courts began using it less. In 2010, the case Bilski v. Kappos found that the machine-or-transformation test was not outdated, but it needed further refinement.

The Federal Circuit’s decision does not define a “machine” as a separate category. It is, however, clear that there is still room for a broader test. This test requires the invention to be a machine or a process that produces an effect. This test may help ensure that patent eligibility is more broadly based than ever.

If the claim is based on a process, it is unlikely to qualify as an abstract idea under the machine-or-transformation test. For example, a machine-or-transformation process might preempt a natural phenomenon or law of nature. That means a process claiming a transformation of a machine would be patentable. However, there are other ways to overcome this preemption test.

Software with a “technical benefit”

One of the basic requirements for obtaining a patent is that your invention provides a “technical benefit” to the public. This benefit must be described in a specific way. For example, if you want to patent an invention for video game software, you should focus on a specific improvement to the technology. If your invention makes games more realistic, focus on improvements to image-processing algorithms.

In order to obtain a patent for an invention that provides a “technical benefit,” the inventor must have performed inventive activity. This means that the invention must be “unobvious” to a person of ordinary skill and experience. However, this doesn’t mean that your invention has to be radically new. Most technical innovations are just further developments of existing products. Even small changes can result in a significant technical benefit and competitive advantage.

Computers and computer-related technology are an example of inventions that provide a “technological benefit”. The EPO has noted that computer-related inventions are intrinsically patentable, because they use mathematical principles to design and produce a real-world result. A simple change in the output units would not make the technology more “technical,” but could still benefit the public.

However, the EPO will have little interest in non-technical aspects of your invention. Even if the invention involves a minor improvement in a technology, this contribution must be sufficiently abstract to ensure that it will be patentable in practice. This test can be difficult to pass in practice, and less technical ideas have often failed to pass the “technical benefit” test in the US.

Nevertheless, it is not so easy to test for the “technical benefit” of computer innovations. For instance, algorithms and digital business methods can be implemented by computer, but the test is not straightforward. To determine whether an invention qualifies as a technical innovation, the inventor must first prove that it provides a “technical benefit” to the public. In this way, the patent process becomes much more straightforward.

There are a number of ways to distinguish between a technical benefit and a “technical benefit.” One strategy involves identifying a patent-worthy invention. The patent examiner will review the patentability of the invention to identify whether it is useful or not. However, a patent may be challenging to obtain, but the patentable invention is more likely to be beneficial. That is why it is vital to ensure that your invention is protected by a patent.

Software “necessarily rooted” in tech

A software idea that is abstract in nature may qualify for patent protection if it solves a problem “necessarily rooted” in computer technology. But to qualify as patentable, the idea must solve the problem in an unconventional manner. And the claims must not preempt every application of the idea or it may be argued to be “abstract.” One thing to make the invention non-abstract is to show how it solves a problem.

There are a few things that need to be kept in mind when patenting a software program. The invention has to be more than just a little extra activity. It must be important to the final goal and play a role in that goal. Software programs are not limited to code; the software architecture is also important. A software program can be patentable without code, but it must be the result of a particular design.

The first step in the process is determining whether or not the program is a problem-solving one. For example, a software program that generates random numbers would not be considered a solution to a technical problem. Instead, it could be an estimate of sales or even a commercial problem. Identifying a technical problem is essential for patentability, so if it’s not solved by the software, it doesn’t qualify as a patentable solution.

In a previous article I discussed how to protect your software from copyright infringement. While software patents aren’t particularly brilliant, they are based on improvements that an expert software designer can come up with during the development of a program. A good designer will often “invent” several improvements during the course of a project. In fact, IBM’s patent number 4,656,583 details several workmanlike speedups for compilers, including register coloring and computing available expressions.

Positioning business method software as patent eligible

A business method is an innovation or process used for conducting an economic activity. A business method patent is a valuable tool for an online company, allowing the owner to prevent competitors from using their process for free. It also gives them the legal right to license the method to other companies in exchange for a fee.

The first step is to clearly identify the real-world value of the business method. This step is crucial. The business method description must include a generalized description of the method itself, a flow chart or diagram, or some other means of explaining how the method works. For example, if the method involves the configuration of a central computer, a detailed description of how the computer can be configured is required. Typically, business methods can be described from more than one viewpoint, so make sure you include as much technical information as possible.

A business method patent must be clearly identifiable in terms of its real-world value. The detailed description must also include how the method works in the context of a central computer. In general, the system should be described as integrated with telecommunications equipment, the Internet, remote computers, and peripheral devices. The business method must be recognizable from all possible viewpoints. Listed below are a few examples of how businesses can patent a business method in software.

To be patentable, a business method must have a real-world application. It cannot be merely an idea; it must provide a tangible result. Ideas are not patentable, and developers must work hard to transform their ideas into practical applications. A patent application description should identify the invention as completely as possible, and include sufficient technical details to demonstrate its utility. In short, a business method based on an idea is patentable, but a non-software application will not be.

A business method for patenting software is a subset of a utility-patent application.  An example of a business method patent is Amazon’s one click patent for ordering on-line.  Despite numerous attempts to invalidate the patent, it survived and just recently expired.  Apple licensed this patent so that is a testimony to its power.

When is a business method patentable in software? There are some questions you need to answer when filing for a patent. Patented business methods must provide a new and unexpected result. If a business method is already in use, there is a risk it might be patented before it can be implemented. In these cases, patent owners can seek an injunction against infringers, which can help them avoid a loss of revenue.

A business method is patentable subject matter in software if it provides a new and improved way to make a product or service. To qualify, a business method must satisfy a usefulness requirement, which is a relatively low threshold. The method must also produce a tangible result. The patent must also show novelty and non-obviousness, which is often determined by examining the natural evolution of similar methods.

As with all business methods, the test for patentability is based on the difference between a business method and a technical product. In the US, a business method will be deemed novel when it meets the requirements of utility, novelty, and non-obviousness. In the EPO, however, business methods will be deemed novel if the steps of the business method provide a technical result. In the EPO, mathematical results cannot be patented unless they can be characterized with technical effects.

In Bilski v. Kappos, the Federal Circuit rejected a requirement that business methods must be tied to a machine or transform articles into an abstract form. While the court accepted this reasoning in the majority of the case, it rejected the machine-or-transformation test as not being a non-exclusive test, rejecting categorical rules that would exclude abstract concepts from patent protection. Nonetheless, in the case of software, the Federal Circuit has yet to rule on the ‘tangibility’ requirement.The process of patenting a business method of software involves submitting a patent application. The business method must be embodied in a computer or over a communications network. Providing only a generalized description of the process is not enough. The applicant must describe how it works in detail. A flow chart is a helpful tool for conveying the underlying concept. A business method can be described from several viewpoints, depending on the specific method being patented.

One example is an expedited online ordering system devised by Amazon. This system enables repeat customers to bypass address entry forms by accessing customer account information. This invention dramatically improved the shopping experience for millions of customers, and Amazon was able to secure a patent for it in 1999. This type of patent is a subtype of utility patent, and is protected as a process.

A business method patent application should describe the following. The subject matter must be useful for a specific purpose, which is often a concrete result. The method must also satisfy a requirement of novelty and non-obviousness, which is typically determined by the natural evolution of previous methods. In addition to proving that a business method is novel, it must demonstrate that it has no obvious equivalent in the marketplace.

A detailed description of the method is included in the utility patent application. A business method patent must be useful to the public and provide value. This method can be licensed to other companies to make money, or it can be used to block competitors. There are many requirements for a business method patent application. Here are some tips for making an application:

The first step is to clearly identify the real-world value of the business method. This step is crucial. The business method description must include a generalized description of the method itself, a flow chart or diagram, or some other means of explaining how the method works. For example, if the method involves the configuration of a central computer, a detailed description of how the computer can be configured is required. Typically, business methods can be described from more than one viewpoint, so make sure you include as much technical information as possible.

Once the US courts grant a business method patent, the patent owner may challenge it. A challenger must show that a business method involves a “novel legal question” or that it is not intended to prevent other businesses from using the technology. If a business shows its use of the method publicly, it may be infringing on the patent. Consequently, a patent owner may be able to seek an injunction against the infringer.

Utility and design patents protect a novel process or function

A utility patent covers a process or invention’s functionality, while a design-based patent protects the ornamentation of a product or service. Both types of patents protect an inventive concept or process, but they have distinct differences. Utility patents are granted to the functional aspects of an invention, while design patents protect a new ornamental design on a manufactured product. A process patent covers a method or steps used to do a business, including software.

A utility patent can cover the functional aspects of a software or hardware system, such as a menu system or a user interface. It can protect a process that allows a user to perform a specific function, such as selecting a menu option. Utility patents provide 20 years of protection. However, because it takes up to three years to obtain a patent from the PTO, the actual period of protection may be reduced to seventeen years.

In the case of an egg beater, for example, an inventor might test three different designs before settling on one. In addition to testing the functionality of each design, the inventor may also talk to potential licensees and potential buyers. The final design, however, may not be feasible for manufacture, and it would cost too much to make, so it’s not worth the money. Having multiple designs will help the inventor determine which design to emphasize and where to focus on patent strategy.

Software and computer program developers are increasingly turning to patents as an alternative to copyrights to protect their creations. Despite limited protection under copyright law, developers must be sure that their invention is novel and unique. Utility and design patents last twenty years, after which they become part of the public domain. They generally cost anywhere from $5,000 to $15,000, depending on the technology used. And the costs depend on the complexity and technicality of the USPTO Examiner assigned to examine the application.

Obtaining a utility or design patent is relatively simple, although there are some costs associated with maintaining a patent. A design patent typically costs half as much as a utility patent, though this price may vary depending on complexity, potential challenges, and attorney fees. Utility patents typically take two years to obtain, and the duration of the process can extend to five. The average duration of a utility patent application can take two to five years, but it can take much longer if it is rejected or an appeal is necessary.

Design patents protect ornamental features

If you’re interested in patenting a computer program, you’ve probably considered applying for a design patent. These patents protect an abstract idea by reducing the resources needed to perform the task. They don’t, however, protect against patents based on the implementation of the idea on software. However, when applying for a design patent, make sure to pay attention to how the abstract idea will be interpreted by judges.

Design patents also protect ornamental designs such as the shape of a coca-cola bottle. The shape helps consumers recognize the company that makes the bottle. A good and thus qualifies for trademark protection as well.

While utility patents protect a functional product, a design patent protects the ornamental look of a product. While design patents are easier to obtain, they are limited in scope. If the design is simple and abstract, another product with the same ornamentation can be designed around it. The protection of a design patent is limited, compared to that of a utility patent. However, a design patent can be much more valuable to an entrepreneur, and he or she may choose to pursue it if it is cost effective.

If you’re interested in protecting your software with a design patent, contact Quarles & Brady today. Their legal team has the necessary knowledge and practice experience to help you secure a design patent. They can answer all your questions related to designing software and designing a design patent. In this way, you’ll have more protection for your software and your company’s future. It’s time to protect your software from patent trolls and other unfair competition.

Non-functional features

Design patentability issues arise when developers want to protect software by patenting non-functional features. These requirements are not directly tied to software functionality and are akin to aesthetics. Furthermore, they can influence the overall performance of a system or application, while not directly affecting user functionalities. Listed below are some examples of non-functional requirements. They may include aesthetics, usability, reliability, efficiency, and portability.

Why you should file a provisional patent application for a software invention

If you have invented a software program, you probably have considered filing a provisional patent application to protect your idea. The main advantage of filing a provisional application is that it is much cheaper than filing an official patent application. Unfortunately, if you want to file a provisional patent application, you will need to pay a small filing fee to the Patent Office.

When filing a regular patent application, you must keep in mind that this will take years. In addition, you will have to pay maintenance fees to keep your patent. While you will still receive priority, the provisional patent application will give you a little more time to refine your software. Besides, you can also get an early filing date. This will help you save money on the filing fee.

The most important part of a provisional patent application is the detailed product description. You must include dimensions, shop drawings, abstracts, schematics, and other relevant product details. You should make sure that your written description is complete, free of grammatical errors, and is easy to understand. Finally, make sure that you have included all relevant information in your provisional patent application.

You don’t need to develop your software innovation to file a patent for it. You just need to make sure that you describe it in enough detail that others will be able to implement it. If you’re not confident that your software innovation will be implemented, you should wait to file a non-provisional patent application. The most obvious reason to wait until a beta version or launch a fully-featured software application is to avoid costly mistakes.

In addition to making your invention patent-ready, a provisional patent application allows you to immediately commercialize your product. This is particularly beneficial if your software has potential to be useful in other areas. Moreover, you can avoid the high costs of a patent if you file a provisional patent application. And it also gives you a better filing date. It’s easy to get a provisional patent application for a software invention because it only costs 20% of the cost of a non-provisional patent application.

Provisional patents are a misnomer

Provisional applications never issue as a patent so there are only provisional applications but not provisional patents.  Thus, a “provisional patent” term is misleading because there are only provisional patent applications, but no provisional patent because the provisional applications never issue (unless converted into a regular utility patent application and granted). A provisional patent application is filed by an inventor to secure an early filing date for his or her invention. A provisional patent does not have a formal patent claim, oath or declaration, information disclosure statement, or any other formal requirements. Instead, it enables the applicant to associate “Patent Pending” with their invention.

When it comes to software patents, provisional patent applications can be a great option for companies with small budgets. This is because provisional patent applications do not require claims, and the patent office does not review them. They can look like anything, including slide decks, academic papers, and marketing materials. The important thing to remember is that provisional patents are not as valuable as their non-provisional counterparts.

A software patent application filed as a provisional can have several benefits. The inventor has a year to decide whether to pursue the patent. Further, the federal government can amend rules regarding software patents. It is possible to obtain a patent for a simple software process, even if it doesn’t change the operating principles of a computer. A provisional patent application gives the inventor the time to save money and work on their invention.

What is needed in a provisional patent application?

Before filing for a provisional patent application, it is crucial to determine the exclusivity of your invention. If someone else has already created or released something similar, then it will be futile to file for one. If you have a new idea, you can do a patent search on the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s website or on the World Intellectual Property Organization’s website to ensure that your product or idea is original and new.

There are several reasons to file for a provisional patent. First of all, it will cost you less than you would have paid for a full patent. Additionally, you will get priority date protection. A faster patent issue will make it easier to sell, license, and enforce your invention. This will ultimately improve your business prospects. You can get the patent issued in as little as 12 months. By following these tips, you’ll be well on your way to patent your software and keep your business afloat.

When it comes to patentability, computer-related inventions must have functional characteristics that transform abstract ideas into a recognizable and patented product. Previously, courts had interpreted the “machine or transformation” test as an important clue in determining whether an invention was patented. In Bilski v. Kappos, however, the Supreme Court left this question open, requiring a process to be tethered to a machine or apparatus and transformation of the article into a different state. The Court ruled that this was a significant clue.

But the form-function model proposes a more reliable patentability test that takes into account both form and function, and does away with ambiguity in the process. This test would be based on approximations of function and form and be applied in addition to other patentability tests. By using the form-function model, inventors would be assured that their software inventions are patent-worthy if they meet both the parameters.

One of the main arguments against patentability is that the mathematical formula in the software is patentable, but its existence does not render the invention non-patentable. Instead, the algorithm must perform some functional property to be patentable. The mathematical formula itself does not need to be a new product; it simply needs to perform a specific function. A mathematical formula in a computer program claim, for example, must meet the requirements of a patentable subject matter.

In the case of computer-based inventions, the Federal Circuit has devised a new test for patentability called the “concrete-use-tangible-result” test. This test requires that the computer program in question produces a tangible, useful, or abstract result. The court also looked at the computer as a new apparatus. This test seems very straightforward and clear, but it’s important to remember that the Federal Circuit is not the only court to apply the “concrete-use-tangible-result” test.

In the case of computer programs, the courts have given primary importance to form and function. It is also important to note that computer-related inventions have not yet failed to meet the machine-or-transformation test. In the case of computer-related inventions, the court has interpreted the Diehr decision to mean that a program that produces a tangible, useful result is patentable.If you want to protect your software idea, you must be confident about its implementation. However, if you’re not sure that it will work, then you should wait until beta or launch it to secure a nonprovisional patent. You may be able to get free legal help, but you can’t be guaranteed that your software won’t be copied or patented by someone else. You should also know the scope of your company and whether or not it is unique and valuable.

While there are many advantages to filing a nonprovisional patent application, you may want to consider a provisional patent application instead. Inventiv is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to help independent inventors protect their products and ideas. While it’s a costly process, it can be very beneficial in the long run. If you can afford it, a provisional patent application can be a good start.

If you don’t have the time to hire a patent attorney, you may decide to file a patent application on your own. However, it’s vital that you know exactly what you want before hiring a lawyer. It’s important to ask many questions and research the different lawyers before you make your decision. If your budget is limited, you can also go with a freelance patent attorney for a fee.

Before applying for a software patent, it’s essential to conduct a patent search to discover similar software programs. A patent search will allow you to see if your software is unique enough to warrant a patent application. If there are numerous patents for software, then it’s unlikely that your application will receive broad protection, which makes the process extremely costly. Similarly, patenting software is a long and difficult process. It can take years and a lot of money. However, it’s well worth the effort.

International Software Considerations

A patent is valid only in the country in which it was issued, so it’s crucial to properly describe the software and the desired results of using it. Patents are not available for software that is merely abstract. Because it is so difficult to patent computer software, the worldwide marketplace does not recognize patented and non-patented software.

The legal standards for granting a patent depend on the country and regional offices. For example, computer programs do not qualify as patentable inventions if they simply implement business processes. However, programs that implement industrial processes can be patented. So, if your computer is an integral part of your invention, you should be sure to patent it. It should be patented so that it can be used by other businesses.

Obtaining a software patent in Europe

The European Patent Convention allows a patent to be issued on inventions in any field, including software, but not on computer programs. The definition of an invention in Europe excludes computer programs, as well as mental acts like playing a game or conducting business. A computer program, however, can be a technically valid solution to a technical problem. In order to get a software patent in Europe, an applicant must prove that their solution is novel and involves an inventive step.

As software is a specialized area, it can be challenging to understand the process. Patent examiner Dr Maria Fernandez-Ferreira offers helpful tips on different aspects of patents, including how they relate to software. Her video tutorials will help you understand what a software patent is and how it relates to your particular technology.

In Europe, inventive step is an important factor in determining whether a certain program or technology qualifies for a patent. Inventive step is a test used in patent challenges, where one side will argue that the new technology or method was not obvious. Inventive step is an important factor because it can help prevent companies from patenting software or computer code that is only marginally improved over existing products. Here are some of the best ways to prove that your software or computer code is new.

• The examining division will evaluate a software code’s novelty on the basis of whether it is new. Whether a program or technique is new will depend on whether it can be readily implemented by a skilled person with the same knowledge. This means that an ordinary computer user is unlikely to have thought of it first. An inventive step is not necessary if a person who understands the concept would have envisioned the technology.
• In this context, an order management system or method could qualify for a patent. For example, a program could unitarily manage the ordering process by automatically storing information about a department or section. If the software is a computer program, the inventive step is the use of a new mathematical algorithm that is not obvious to the general public. For example, if a company makes an image enhancement software program, it might be able to obtain a patent for the new algorithm. However, patentability would depend on the non-obviousness of the algorithm.

Using this technique, a hypothetical software development team is required to use the best available equipment and sufficient time to implement the invention. The hypothetical team should also be credited with the best available equipment, sufficient time, and sufficient funding. These factors should not be a limiting factor in determining whether or not the proposed software is useful. It will also provide a clearer picture of the scope of the invention, allowing the patenting office to make a decision more quickly.

The inventive step rule determines whether a new product or idea can be patented. It prevents people from making patents for old, common ideas and helps create new ones. Inventive step rules allow people to get money for their ideas and stop companies from copying their products, but it is important to keep in mind that your product must be a significant improvement over a previously known product or idea. Here are some reasons why you should follow the rules for software patentability.

EPO examiners look for a problem-solution approach. This approach requires that the claimed process causes a technical effect when executed on a computer. The technical effect must be far beyond the usual physical interactions between the software and the computer. In addition, the claimed process must not have been known to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and it must not be obvious to one who has no technical knowledge of the subject matter.

The EPO considers a computer software that enhances a picture differently than software that improves a mathematical algorithm. Digital image enhancement is seen as a highly technical process, and a new mathematical algorithm in such a program may give rise to a technical innovation. In this case, the software may be patentable, depending on the algorithm used. The algorithm’s non-obviousness is the key to patentability.

During the patenting process, software developers may be faced with objections from various parties. Some claim that software patenting is trivial and prevents development. Different countries approach the issue differently. In Europe, they apply the ‘Inventive step test’. The ‘Inventive step test’ is a key element in the patent process for software, and it has been implemented as part of the European Patent Directive.

As with any technology, a computer program must meet the classical requirements for patentability. This means that the results of a computer program’s implementation cannot be a mere result of a previous technique. In addition, a computer program must also have an additional technical effect. In other words, a computer program that performs a specific task must be more valuable than a similar program that does the same thing in a different way.

Obtaining a software patent in the United States

Obtaining a software patent in the US is similar to obtaining a patent for any other type of invention. Patent claims must be definite, novel, and non-obvious, and the specification must describe the claimed subject matter in sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art could practice it. There are many factors to consider when drafting a software patent application, and it is helpful to seek professional help.

First, it is vital to choose a qualified attorney. A qualified lawyer can guide you through the entire process, and they can be invaluable in the initial phases of drafting a patent application. Claims, which describe specific parts of software, are critical to the patent application process. Working with an attorney can help minimize the risk of rejection by the USPTO. While it is not impossible to draft the patent application without an attorney, working with a lawyer is always a good idea.

The next step is to carefully define the invention. A software patent application may be difficult to file due to its broad scope. But it can be possible to get approval for your software invention if it solves a common computing challenge in a novel way. A software patent application should be carefully written to address these issues and to protect the invention. You can also apply for a software patent if you developed software that speeds up processes, uses less resources, or reduces the need for humans to carry out the task.

The process of obtaining a software patent in the US is more complicated than ever. After the Alice decision, software inventions that improve the functionality of computers can still get a patent in the US. However, the recent Mayo v. CLS Bank case shook up long-standing approaches to ensuring new software applications are protected. To ensure a successful outcome, software patent applicants should retain counsel of a USPTO registered patent practitioner.

While the process of obtaining a software patent in the United States is complicated, the benefits are worth it. Software patents protect software programs and algorithms, and they can help protect concepts and ideas related to these programs. The first step is to draft an application that outlines the technical benefits of the claimed software. If your application is accepted, you can then begin the process of filing for your software patent. This will give you the chance to develop and improve your software.

Obtaining a software patent in India

Obtaining a software patent in India requires some research and preparation. The patent process is not simple and requires a high level of technical expertise as well as an economic significance to qualify for protection. However, it is possible to obtain a software patent in India through a process known as “patentability search”.

First of all, what is software? Simply put, it is a set of instructions for computing systems. Buyers of software obtain a license to use that software and instructions. However, piracy, copyrighting, imitation, and being outdated can result in unstated economic losses. Therefore, a software patent is important to protect a company’s economic interest and encourage innovation. As an example, Google has been granted a patent on location history filtering, and Oracle and Microsoft have been granted a patent on Disaggregated Secure Execution Environment.

In order to obtain a software patent in India, the invention must be of a mechanical nature and have industrial use. While computer programs are not patented in their own right, they can be patented as a part of an invention. The software must have the capability to perform an industrial task and be innovative. The Patents Amendments Act, 2002 is the primary legislation governing the process of obtaining a software patent in India. Clause k of the Act includes a new proposed clause that adds the word “per se” to the computer program.

Obtaining a software patent in India can be a complex process, but it is possible to secure protection for your invention through patent protection in India. Before filing a software patent, ensure you understand the nuances of the process. Your invention should be fully described in detail, and its advantages over existing solutions should be stated. Objects, diagrams, and flowcharts can help you visualize the product.

Software inventors and companies are increasingly looking for ways to protect their intellectual property. The growth of the internet and the resulting competition has increased the demand for software patents in India. The Indian Patent Office has detailed guidelines regarding patenting CRIs. IPFlair experts have the expertise to help you navigate the complex procedures of patenting your software invention. They can even assist you with legal objections raised by the IPO.

Obtaining a software patent in China

While patentability is still an important part of protecting software rights, the rules for obtaining a software patent in China are becoming more lax. In the US, the patent eligibility standard is the same as in China, which means that software applications are subject to similar criteria. For example, a software application cannot be patented unless it combines some form of computer programming with a physical embodiment. A Chinese software patent application, on the other hand, must be unique.

In China, software patents are a relatively new innovation. Previously, you could only patent software that was used for industrial processes or business methods. But this has changed recently. As of April 1, China has now opened the door for software patents. The revised patent examination guidelines make it easier to patent software containing no hardware element. Moreover, Chinese courts have improved their technical requirements for software patents, which has opened up new avenues for developers.

While software patents are not as common as their US counterparts, they are still an excellent option for those who wish to protect their products. Software patents require a new and useful process or improvement and are an integral part of today’s business models. The China IP Law Firm has significant experience in protecting software, including financial transaction software, medical diagnostic software, and electronic advertising. A software patent is filed under the “utility” patent category.

Now over to you

Patents are valuable commercial assets. They protect your company’s investment and ensure that no one else can copy the claimed software. It also prevents third parties from making, selling, or importing the claimed software. Because of this, patent owners should consider defending their patent rights to maximize their company’s value. Prospective investors, strategic acquirers, and partners may value this right. Therefore, it’s imperative to carefully consider the advantages of obtaining a patent.

In order to be gramted a software patent, it is essential to meet the standards of eligibility, novelty, non-obviousness, and originality. These standards are difficult to meet, and failing to file a patent application can lead to an invalidation of the patent. It is important to hire an attorney with expertise in software to avoid mistakes and get the right protection for your software. In addition to ensuring that you meet these standards, an attorney will also be able to guide you through the entire process.

Your application should demonstrate that your software helps to improve performance in terms of speed, quality of result, or combination thereof. Software developers often tend to be vague about technical specifications due to lack of time, but they are specific and detailed in their descriptions.  Having patent attorneys who are well familiar with software can help in flushing out the details The application should demonstrate a unique method for achieving a particular goal with a computer. It should either perform a completely new process or improve an existing one.  Algorithm and/or flowcharts can describe the program’s technical aspects in detail.

Obtaining a software patent is an expensive process. It typically costs between five and fifteen thousand dollars. Nevertheless, if you expect your new startup to be the next unicorn, it may be worth the investment to help you dominate the space you invented. A software patent can provide significant protection for your invention. As with any technology, it is essential to seek professional counsel. It is a long and difficult process that will not pay off in the short term.

We help clients identify new markets and strategic partners to add value during our consultations. We will do everything we can to lower costs for our clients. We offer most of our services for a fixed price to ensure that clients have clear objectives and can meet their budgets. Our fixed fee approach applies to:

• Preparing, filing, and prosecuting patent applications at USPTO
• Opinions on patentability, validity, and infringement.
• Enforcement of patent rights in U.S. District Courts and on appeal
• Post-issuance Proceedings of the USPTO

We encourage you to request our list of typical patent fees. For more information about our services, call us at 800-234-3032 or schedule a strategy call with us.