View source for United Kingdom

ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.

You can view and copy the source of this page.

'''The United Kingdom''' is part of the [[European Union]], is a signatory of the [[European Patent Convention]], and has substantial [[case law in the UK|case law]] on [[patentable subject matter]].

[[Software patents]] exist in the UK.  They get granted by the patent office ([[UKIPO]]) and get upheld by the courts (example: [[Symbian v. Comptroller General (2008, UK)]]).  The mitigating factor is that the [[case law in the UK]] is not strong, so this may change in future rulings.

==Legislation==
[[Patentable subject matter]] in the UK is defined in the following part of the [http://www.bailii.org/uk/legis/num_act/1977/1344006.html UK Patent Act 1977]:

<blockquote>
(2) It is hereby declared that the following (among other things) are not inventions for the purposes of this Act, that is to say, anything which consists of —''<br />
 (a) a discovery, scientific theory or mathematical method;''<br />
 (b) a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work or any other aesthetic creation whatsoever;''<br />
 (c) a scheme, rule or method for performing a mental act, playing a game or doing business, or a program for a computer;''<br />
 (d) the presentation of information; but the foregoing provision shall prevent anything from being treated as an invention for the purposes of this Act only to the extent that a patent or application for a patent relates to that thing as such.
</blockquote>

This is interpreted identical to the [[European Patent Convention]], as noted by Lord Justice Jacob in the 2006 ''[[Aerotel v. Telco]]'' ruling:

<blockquote>
these appeals turn on the application of Art.52(2) and 52(3) of the [[European Patent Convention|EPC]]. The provision was implemented in UK law by s.1(2) of the Patents Act 1977. Although s.1(2) pointlessly uses somewhat different wording from that of the EPC no-one suggests that it has any different meaning. So we, like the parties before us, work directly from the source.''<ref>http://www.patent.gov.uk/2006ewcaciv1371.pdf</ref>
</blockquote>

==Prime Minister's Office comments==

In a February 2007 response to a petition, the Prime Minister's Office commented that "''Although certain jurisdictions, such as the US, allow more liberal patenting of software-based inventions, these patents cannot be enforced in the UK.  The test used to discern between patentable and non-patentable subject matter in the UK has recently been clarified by the courts, and is applied rigorously by the Patent Office.''" <ref>http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page11077</ref>

One year later, in October 2008, the UK courts upheld a patent which was very certainly a software patent: [[Symbian v. Comptroller General (2008, UK)]].

UK politicians probably believe the myth that [[patent standards here are higher than in the USA]].

==Patent office decisions==
{{main|UK patent office}}

==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==
* [[Case law in the UK]]
* [[UK patent courts and appeals]]
* [[Patent office practice in the UK]]
* [[Hargreaves review of UK patent law]]

==External links==
* http://eupat.ffii.org/players/uk/index.en.html
* http://www.softwarepatents.co.uk/
* [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/16/uk_firm_patents_downloads/ BTG patent on downloading software]
* [http://web.archive.org/web/20041228012853/http://www.richardallan.org.uk/archives/000249.html A 2004 letter from MP Richard Allan to the UK's Council representative]
* [http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/softwarepatents.xml OSS-watch's swpats page]
* [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/DTLJ/1999/3.html A 1998 conference report that mentions political pressures for the extension of swpats into Europe]
* [http://www.timj.co.uk/digiculture/patents/timeline.php Software patents : Timeline of Tim Jackson's correspondence] - with the MEPs of the UK ''(see: [[EU software patents directive]])''
* [http://www.pannone.com/article-detail.asp?pubid=28&articleid=216 Is your software patentable?], by David Sant
*:Sant is known to be very pro-swpat, so when he says some categories are ''not'' patentable, we can trust it's not just his bias.

==References==
{{reflist}}


{{footer}}
[[Category:Countries and regions]]
[[Category:United Kingdom]]
[[Category:European Patent Convention signatories]]

Templates used on this page:

Template:Footer (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Main (view source)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)

Return to United Kingdom.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.endsoftwarepatents.org/wiki/United_Kingdom"

Anonymous

Search

Navigation

Navigation

Contributing

End Software Patents

Get involved

Wiki tools

Wiki tools

Namespaces

Page actions

Anonymous

Search

Navigation

Wiki tools

Page tools

View source for United Kingdom