Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

The Philippines: Examination guidelines for ICT and computer related inventions

On January 17 2018, the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines issued its Guidelines on the Examination of Information Communications Technology (ICT) and Computer Implemented Inventions (CII), as a result of increasing demand for patent protection in these fields. In the past, patent examiners applied the general guidelines for patent examination, but difficulties encountered by patent examiners resulting in inconsistent decisions on patent grants and refusals necessitated the issuance of separate examination guidelines. These guidelines do not have the force of law but are meant to assist the examiners in determining whether the claimed inventions comply with the substantive law (Sections 21 and 22 of the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines (IP Code) and its Implementing Rules 201 and 202).

ICT refers to all electronic means to access, create, collect, store, process, receive, transmit, present and disseminate information. CII are inventions involving computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatus where prima facie one or more of the features are realised by means of a program or programs. The guidelines apply to the examination of patent applications for inventions in the ICT field such as information systems, communication systems, telecommunications, radio communications, computer implemented systems, software related systems, data mining systems, computer information networking systems, computer operating systems, embedded systems, data warehousing systems, network and data security systems, multimedia design systems, content delivery systems, digital broadcasting, graphic representation devices, website development platforms, application development platforms, system development platforms, cloud computing infrastructure, ubiquitous computing frameworks, mobile computing systems, internet of things (IoT) infrastructure, virtual infrastructure, electronic commerce systems, electronic services systems, electronic workflow frameworks, object modelling systems, image or video processing systems, photonics systems, machine learning systems, artificial intelligence systems, distributed systems, robotic systems, sensing devices and big media modelling systems.

Section 21 of the IP Code defines an invention capable of being patented as any technical solution to a problem in any new field of human activity which involves an inventive step and is industrially applicable, and may be or may relate to a product, a process or an improvement thereof. Section 22 lists inventions that are non-patentable, and those which relate to ICT and CII are further explained in Rule 202. Under this rule, the following are excluded from patent protection:

a) discoveries, scientific theories, mathematical methods, a law of nature, a scientific truth or knowledge of such;

b) abstract ideas or theories, fundamental concepts, apart from the means or processes for carrying out the concepts to produce a technical effect;

c) schemes, rules, and methods for performing mental acts and playing games;

d) method of doing business, such as a method or system for transacting business without the technical means for carrying out the method or system;

e) programs for computers.


Editha R Hechanova

Hechanova & Co., Inc.

Salustiana D. Ty Tower

104 Paseo de Roxas Avenue

Makati City 1229, Philippines

Tel: (63) 2 812-6561

Fax: (63) 2 888-4290

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

IP counsel urge the government to restrict safe harbour exceptions available to intermediaries and clear up doubts with the existing law
A New York lawyer could face sanctions after citing fake judgments generated by ChatGPT, but that doesn’t mean practitioners should shy away from AI
Klaus Grabinski told delegates at a UPC inauguration event that the proposed SEP regulation would limit access to justice
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Sukanya Sarkar shares her thoughts on this year’s annual meeting in Singapore, where debates ranged from AI opportunities to improving law firm culture
The court’s ruling is a good reminder that US parties aren’t guaranteed attorney fees just because they win, say sources
With business confidence in a shaky state, Rachel Tan and Lisa Yong of Rouse discuss how in-house IP teams can manage their trademark portfolios through uncertain times
The Court of Appeal had stern words for Med-El’s representatives after they highlighted a deputy judge’s background as a solicitor
Funders and NPEs say asserting patent portfolios can minimise risk at the USPTO’s PTAB, where procedure remains a controversial topic
The US Supreme Court’s ruling wasn’t a surprise and reflects a trend that had already been bubbling away for a while, say tech and pharma counsel