Spain: Software in the light of the new Spanish patent law

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

Spain: Software in the light of the new Spanish patent law

Much water has flowed under the bridge since 1986, yet the law regulating the patentability of software remains the same. A close look at the new guidelines for examination in the Spanish Patent and Trade Mark Office (OEPM) shows that those aspects concerning patentability remain the same as in the original Guidelines … so we may give it a big yes, nothing has changed.

At the OEPM, formal and technical examinations are carried out at the same time; so, on the one hand computer programs may be a form of computer-implemented inventions while, on the other hand, computer programs are included in the list of exclusions.

In the light of new Spanish patent law, computer programs are still excluded but as for the other elements of that list, the scope of exclusion is limited; that is, only the exclusion of the invention applies insofar as the object for protection as claimed comprises one of said inventions as such. Thus, the Spanish law expressly allows methods to be carried by a programmable devices or systems as long as the computer program is capable of producing, when running in the corresponding programmable device or system, a further technical effect that goes beyond those normal physical effects implicit to the device or system themselves; this is the so called further technical effect we may find in the guidelines for examination in the European Patent Office on GII, 3.6.

Nonetheless, we may still find claims comprising both technical and no technical features. In this regard the new guidelines for examination in the OEPM state that the implementation of an invention, considered for other reasons not intrinsically patentable, using physical elements or technical means, does not alter the essence of the invention. Hence, the mere use of technical means for the implementation of an excluded invention from patentability does not necessarily give the essential technical nature which averts that exclusion.

Since the nature of the invention in view of the exclusions to patentability is examined at the same time as the formal examination is carried out, we are not going to receive a search report with a written opinion regarding those aspects that are deemed to be an invention.

This is still a problem with the new law and the corresponding guidelines for examination in Spain: claims comprising technical and non-technical features (mixed claims) may not pass the first filter at the OEPM.

robledo.jpg

Ignacio Robledo


PONS IPGlorieta Rubén Darío, 428010 – Madrid SpainTel: +34 917007600Fax: +34 913086103clientes@pons.eswww.ponsip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Shem Otanga discusses the importance of curiosity and passion, and why he would have loved to have been a professional recording artist
Practitioners say the Bombay High Court shouldn’t have refused well-known trademark recognition for TikTok simply because the app is banned in India
In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Attorneys at four firms explain the AI trends they expect in the future, including a potential shift in who plaintiffs sue for copyright infringement
The dispute at the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court pits Dryrobe against D-Robe and will include a ‘genericide’ element
Novo Nordisk losing patent rights covering Ozempic in Canada and a US Supreme Court decision favouring Ed Sheeran were also among the top talking points
The court will hand down its ruling in Iconix v Dream Pairs on Tuesday, June 24, in a case that concerns post-sale confusion
Developments included a stay in a row concerning the UPC’s jurisdiction and a timeline for the rollout of the long-awaited new CMS
Jorg Thomaier, who has been head of IP at the German pharma company since 2010, will leave later this year and hand the reins to the company’s head of patents
Companies must conduct thorough IP due diligence – even if it may not be mandatory
Gift this article