Australia: Patent Office guidelines for computer implemented inventions

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Australia: Patent Office guidelines for computer implemented inventions

Following on from recent Patent Office success in courts in rejecting business method patents, the Patent Office has released new guidelines on the patentability of computer implemented inventions.

While the court authorities are on appeal, the Office has proceeded to issue the guidelines to align practices with its preferred position, which was adopted by a recent Full Federal Court decision. The new guidelines appear to centralise power with the Office in adopting an approach that the Office will "go beyond the form of words used". The Office will be allowed to allege the "substance of the alleged invention" is a scheme even where the claims define a physical product.

The list of factors the Office will take into account are many and varied, and appear to leave a wide discretion to the Office, in the rejection or acceptance of patent applications. Factors include whether the "contribution" is technical in nature and whether the method "merely requires a generic computer implementation". The guidelines appear to be driven by the Office's desire not to consider business method innovations as worthy of protection. No consideration of the need to protect this area of innovation appears to have been given. There also appears little chance of legislative change in the foreseeable future.

Overall, there is a necessity for applicants to carefully consider the drafting of their patent applications in order to minimise the opportunities for the Office to reject an applicant's innovative endeavours as being too "business method" in nature. Through careful drafting, applicants may be able to negate the Office's wide discretion.

treloar.jpg

Peter Treloar


Shelston IPLevel 21, 60 Margaret StreetSydney NSW 2000, AustraliaTel: +61 2 9777 1111Fax: +61 2 9241 4666email@shelstonip.comwww.shelstonip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Alston & Bird acted for InterDigital, while Samsung was represented by Fish & Richardson, during the arbitration process
Powell Gilbert lawyers reveal how they navigated parallel EPO proceedings and collaborated with European peers to come out on top in the Nordic-Baltic Division’s first judgment
The firms posted increases in revenue and profit per equity partner, with both giving a nod to their IP expertise
EasyGroup, the owner of the easyJet airline, said in a press release that UK-based first-instance judges are “less experienced”, bringing a long-running debate back to the fore
A cross-practice team from Mayer Brown, which included members of the firm’s IP practice, advised on the deal
María Cecilia Romoleroux discusses the challenges she has faced in her career in IP and how she hopes to improve things for the next generation of women
Value-added services give in-house counsel the satisfaction that they are getting more value for money, while law firms get the opportunity to win more work
A team at Boies Schiller Flexner is advising shoe company Kizik and parent company HandsFree Labs in the dispute
Nokia’s latest enforcement actions against Geely and Transsion joining Via LA’s AAC pool were also among the top talking points
Benjamin Kelly, the firm’s fifth IP partner hire in a little over one year, has experience in patent and trade secret disputes involving complex technologies
Gift this article