The case concerned inventorship of method and apparatus claims. There was inventive skill in the arrangement of the apparatus. It was not a case of adding common general knowledge to the inventive concept. It was held that there was joint inventorship.
The case concerned Electronic Gaming Machines (EMGs). Feature games were implemented in the EGMs to encourage players to keep wagering by making it more interesting to do so. The majority held that the correct enquiry comprised: (a) Is the invention claimed a computer-implemented invention?; and (b) If so, can the invention claimed broadly be described as an advance in computer technology?
In order to sustain a software patent in Australia there must be an advance in computer technology that overcomes a technical problem. The provision of a health and safety management system that provides notifications and responds dynamically to changes in authority was seen as the deployment of existing technology.
Sustaining a software patent in New Zealand may be problematic where the invention lies in a graphical user interface.
The case concerns evidence in inventorship disputes in an administrative setting before the Patent Office.
Trade Mark Non-Use – Part of the Mark (04-Feb-2019)A Case of Non-Use?Based on a recent...
Nature’s Care’s Fish Oil: Is It Really ‘Australian Made’? (30-Jan-2019) A country can have...
Federal Court’s Decision on ‘EVENPAY’ (29-Jan-2019) A Red-Letter Day for Red Energy? ...
Colour Marks (18-Oct-2017) Does a Trade Mark in Black and White Matter? The rules for...