Patenting of Software- an Insight

An Overview Of Software Patentingleast 20 years for a product patent and 15 years
The concept of “intellectual property” inin the case of a process patent. For Copyright,
India over the last few years has taken on somethe agreement prescribes a minimum period of
epic proportions for a number of reasons. One ofthe lifetime of the author plus seventy years.
the primary reasons, attributable to the growingJurisdictions Of Software Patenting
awareness among the urban Indian population, isSubstantive law regarding the patentability of
of the significance and, more importantly, thesoftware and computer-implemented inventions,
commercial benefits in protecting its intellectualand case law interpreting the legal provisions, are
property rights both within and outside India. Anddifferent under different jurisdictions.
under traditional principles of intellectual propertySoftware patents under multilateral treaties:
protection, patent law is to encourage scientific• Software patents under TRIPs Agreement
research, new technology and industrial progress.• Software patents under the European Patent
The fundamental principle of patent law is that theConvention
patent is granted only for an invention i.e. new and• Computer programs and the Patent
useful the said invention must have novelty andCooperation Treaty
utility. The grant of patent thus becomes ofSoftware patenting under TRIPs Agreement
industrial property and also called an intellectualThe WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related
property. And the computer software is aAspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs),
relatively new recipient of patent protection.particularly Article 27, are subject to debate on
The term “Patent’’ has its origin fromthe international legal framework for the
the term “Letter Patent’’. Thispatentability of software, and on whether
expression ‘Letter Patent’ meant opensoftware and computer-implemented inventions
letter and were instruments under the Great Sealshould be considered as a field of technology.
of King of England addressed by the Crown to allAccording to Art. 27 of TRIPS Agreement,
the subjects at large in which the Crownpatents shall be available for any inventions,
conferred certain rights and privileges on one orwhether products or processes, in all fields of
more individuals in the kingdom. It was in the latertechnology, provided that they are new, involve
part of the 19th century new inventions in thean inventive step and are capable of industrial
field of art, process, method or manner ofapplication. (...) patents shall be available and patent
manufacture, machinery and other substancesrights enjoyable without discrimination as to the
produced by manufacturers were on increasedplace of invention, the field of technology and
and the inventors became very much interestedwhether products are imported or locally
that the inventions done by them should not beproduced."
infringed by any one else by copying them or byHowever, there have been no dispute settlement
adopting the methods used by them. To save theprocedures regarding software patents. Its
interests of inventors, the then British rulersrelevance for patentability in the
enacted the Indian Patents and Design Act, 1911.computer-implemented business methods, and
With respect to patentability of software -relatedsoftware information technology remains
inventions, it is currently one of the most heateduncertain, since the TRIPs agreement is subject
areas of debate. Software has becometo interpretation.
patentable in recent years in most jurisdictionsSoftware patents under the European Patent
(although with restrictions in certain countries,Convention
notably those signatories of the European PatentWithin European Union member states, the EPO
Convention or EPC) and the number of softwareand other national patent offices have issued
patents has risen rapidly.many patents for inventions involving software
Meaning Of Software Patentingsince the European Patent Convention (EPC) came
The term “software” does not have ainto force in the late 1970s. Article 52 EPC
precise definition and even the software industriesexcludes "programs for computers" from
fails to give an specific definition. But it is basicallypatentability (Art. 52(2)) to the extent that a
used to describe all of the different types ofpatent application relates to a computer program
computer programs. Computer programs are"as such" (Art. 52(3)). This has been interpreted to
basically divided into “application programs”mean that any invention which makes a
and “operating system programs”.non-obvious "technical contribution" or solves a
Application programs are designed to do specific"technical problem" in a non-obvious way is
tasks to be executed through the computer andpatentable even if a computer program is used in
the operating system programs are used tothe invention. Computer-implemented inventions
manage the internal functions of the computer towhich only solve a business problem using a
facilitate use of application program.computer, rather than a technical problem, are
Though the term ‘Software patent’ doesconsidered unpatentable as lacking an inventive
not have a universally accepted definition. Onestep. Nevertheless, the fact that an invention is
definition suggested by the Foundation for a Freeuseful in business does not mean it is not
Information Infrastructure is that a softwarepatentable if it also solves a technical problem.
patent is a "patent on any performance of aComputer programs and the Patent Cooperation
computer realized by means of a computerTreaty
program".The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an
According to Richard Stallman, the co-developerinternational patent law treaty, which provides a
of the GNU-Linux operating system andunified procedure for filing patent applications to
proponent of Free Software says, “Softwareprotect inventions. A patent application filed under
patents are patents which cover software ideas,the PCT is called an international application or PCT
ideas which you would use in developing software.application. Under the PCT, the international search
That is Software patents refer to patents thatand the preliminary examination are conducted by
could be granted on products or processesInternational Searching Authorities (ISA) and
(including methods) which include or may includeInternational Preliminary Examining Authority
software as a significant or at least necessary(IPEA).
part of their implementation, i.e. the form in whichCurrent Trend
they are put in practice (or used) to produce theHowever, before we start hailing the advent of a
effect they intend to provide.new era and equating the patenting of software
Early example of a software patentin India it would be well worth our while to take a
On 21st Sep 1962, a British patent applicationpause and examine the realities of software
entitled "A Computer Arranged for the Automaticpatenting. We could do this by looking at
Solution of Linear Programming Problems" wasexamples of countries in which software patenting
filed. The invention was concerned with efficienthas already become the order of the day, such
memory management for the simplex algorithm,as in the US and Japan
and may be implemented by purely softwareUnited States
means. The patent was granted on August 17,The United States Patent and Trademark Office
1966 and seems to be one of the first software(USPTO) has traditionally not considered software
patents.to be patentable because by statute patents can
Conceptual Difference Between Copyright Andonly be granted to "processes, machines, articles
Patentof manufacture, and compositions of matter". i.e.
Software has traditionally been protected underIn particular, patents cannot be granted to
copyright law since code fits quite easily into the"scientific truths" or "mathematical expressions" of
description of a literary work. Thus, Software isthem. The USPTO maintained the position that
protected as works of literature under the Bernesoftware was in effect a mathematical algorithm,
Convention, and any software written isand therefore not patentable, into the 1980s. This
automatically covered by copyright. This allowsposition of the USPTO was challenged with a
the creator to prevent another entity fromlandmark 1981 Supreme Court case, Diamond v.
copying the program and there is generally noDiehr. The case involved a device that used
need to register code in order for it to becomputer software to ensure the correct timing
copyrighted. While Software Patenting haswhen heating, or curing, rubber. Although the
recently emerged (if only in the US, Japan andsoftware was the integral part of the device, it
Europe) where, Patents give their owners thealso had other functions that related to real world
right to prevent others from using a claimedmanipulation. The court then ruled that as a device
invention, even if it was independently developedto mold rubber, it was a patentable object. The
and there was no copying involved.court essentially ruled that while algorithms
Further, it should be noted that patents cover thethemselves could not be patented, devices that
underlying methodologies embodied in a givenutilized them could.
piece of software. On the other copyrightBut in 1982 the U.S. Congress created a new
prevents the direct copying of software, but docourt i.e the Federal Circuit to hear patent cases.
not prevent other authors from writing their ownThis court allowed patentability of software, to be
embodiments of the underlying methodologies.treated uniformly throughout the US. Due to a
The issues involved in conferring patent rights tofew landmark cases in this court, by the early
software are, however, a lot more complex than1990s the patentability of software was well
taking out copyrights on them. Specifically, thereestablished. Moreover, Several successful litigations
are two challenges that one encounters whenshow that software patents are now enforceable
dealing with software patents. The first is aboutin the US. That is the reason, Patenting software
the instrument of patent itself and whether thehas become widespread in the US. As of 2004,
manner of protection it confers is suited to theapproximately 145,000 patents had issued in the
software industry. The second is the nature of22 classes of patents covering computer
software, and whether it should be subject toimplemented inventions.
patenting.Japan
However, issues involved in conferring patentSoftware is directly patentable in Japan. In various
rights to software are a lot more complex thanlitigations in Japan, software patents have been
taking out copyrights on them. Specifically, theresuccessfully enforced. In 2005, for example,
are two challenges that one encounters whenMatsushita won a court order barring Justsystem
dealing with software patents. The first is aboutfrom infringing Matsuhita's Japanese patent
the instrument of patent itself and whether the2,803,236 covering word processing software.
manner of protection it confers is suited to theIndian Position
software industry. The second is the nature ofWith respect to computer software, in Patents
software and whether it should be subject to(Amendment) Act, 2002, the scope of
patenting.a) Different Subject Mattersnon-patentable subject matter in the Act was
Copyright protection extends to all original literaryamended to include the following: "a mathematical
works (among them, computer programs),method or a business method or a computer
dramatic, musical and artistic works, including films.programme per se or algorithms".
Under copyright, protection is given only to theHowever, the recent amendment changes
particular expression of an idea that was adopted(Ordinance, 2004), which amends the Patents Act,
and not the idea itself. (For instance, a program to1970, has been promulgated after receiving
add numbers written in two different computerassent from the President of India and has came
languages would count as two differentinto effect from 1st Jan., 2005. Apart from
expressions of one idea) Effectively, independentchange in pharmaceuticals and agro chemicals, one
rendering of a copyrighted work by a third partyof the seminal amendments this Ordinance seeks
would not infringe the copyright.to bring is to permit the patenting of embedded
Generally patents are conferred on any 'new' andsoftware.
'useful' art, process, method or manner ofHence, the amendment means that while a
manufacture, machines, appliances or othermathematical or a business method or an
articles or substances produced by manufacture.algorithm cannot be patented, a computer
Worldwide, the attitude towards patentability ofprogramme which has a technical application in any
software has been skepticalb) Who may claim theindustry or which can be incorporated in hardware
right to a patent /copyright?can be patented. Since any commercial software
Generally, the author of a literary, artistic, musicalhas some industry application and all applications
or dramatic work automatically becomes thecan be construed as technical applications,
owner of its copyright. The patent, on the otherobviously it opens all software patenting.
hand is granted to the first to apply for it,In any case, any company seeking to file a patent
regardless of who the first to invent it was.application for software under the Ordinance
Patents cost a lot of money. They cost evenshould ensure that its invention firstly, follows the
more paying the lawyers to write the applicationthree basic tests:
than they cost to actually apply. It takes typically• Inventive Steps
some years for the application to get considered,• Novelty
even though patent offices do an extremely• Usefulness
sloppy job of considering.c) Rights conferredTherefore, it is important that the software
Copyright law gives the owner the exclusive rightsought to be protected is not merely a new
to reproduce the material, issue copies, perform,version or an improvement over an existing code.
adapt and translate the work. However, theseFurther, in accordance with the specific
rights are tempered by the rights of fair userequirements of the Ordinance with regard to
which are available to the public. Under "fair use",patentability of software, the software should
certain uses of copyright material would not benecessarily have a technical application to the
infringing, such as use for academic purposes,industry or be intrinsic to or “embedded”
news reporting etc. Further, independentin hardware. This is to prevent against any future
recreation of a copyrighted work would notlitigation or claims of infringements being raised,
constitute infringement. Thus if the same piece ofwhich is a distinct probability even after a patent
code were independently developed by twohas been granted.
different companies, neither would have a claimConclusion
against the other.India for its part seems to have adopted the
A patent confers on the owner an absolutemore conservative approach of the European
monopoly which is the right to prevent otherspatenting norms for software. But the Ordinance
from making, using, offering for sale without hisdefinitely has its use and relevance in today’s
her consent. In general, patent protection is a farIndia, particularly for our growing domestic semi-
stronger method of protection than copyrightconductor industry. This, along with judicial
because the protection extends to the level oftempering might definitely ensure a judicious use
the idea embodied by a software and injunctsof patent protection while allowing the industry to
ancillary uses of an invention as well. It wouldgrow through innovations and inventions, thereby,
weaken copyright in software that is the base ofmitigating the risks of trivial patents chocking the
all European software development, becauselife out of real innovations and inventions. This is
independent creations protected by copyrightthe reason a patent should always be treated as
would be attackable by patents. Many patenta “double edged sword”, to be wielded
applications cover very small and specificwith caution and sensitivity. Now whether, in
algorithms or techniques that are used in a widereality this will be implemented on a rigid basis or
variety of programs. Frequently the "inventions"will become broad in scope through application (as
mentioned in a patent application have beenin the U.S.), and, more importantly, whether the
independently formulated and are already in useOrdinance would, in fact, result in increased
by other programmers when the application isinnovation and inventions in the software industry,
filed.d) Duration of protectionremains to be seen.
The TRIPS agreement mandates a period of at