This site discusses the patentability of computer implemented inventions in the UK and Europe and the harmonisation - or lack thereof - of both the law and practice in these two jurisdictions.

The reasoning of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in the Aerotel v Telco and Macrossan judgment forms the basis for the current practice of the UK Intellectual Property Office, when assessing whether patent applications are for patentable subject matter. The approach applied in the judgment has been criticized by a Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) as being "irreconcilable with the European Patent Convention"

Efforts by the UK courts to remedy this situation have been hindered by the wording of their own judgments and the subsequent strict interpretation by the UK Intellectual Property Office.

This has serious implications for industry in the UK as there is little certainty as to what is patentable with respect to Computer Implemented Inventions and many companies are now seeking protection by the more expensive European route.

Case law delivered since this judgment is considered as well as the questions subsequently rejected by the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO. It was hoped that their response would result in a clarification of the bounds of patentability in this complex area of patent law.

The very recent attempts to revive the unitary patent for Europe by the EU Council and the likelihood of success are also discussed. Enter