EPO Clarifies When Presentation of Information Can Provide a Technical, Patentable Invention
This article was taken from the Venner Shipley Newsletter edition 20
The European Patent Office (EPO) surprised many observers recently when it issued decision T 49/04 (Text Processor/WALKER). The invention concerned the computerised processing of natural language text to display text segments in a way which enabled a user to read the text more quickly. The processing involved applying some rules which broke text according to punctuation and speech attributes, and cascading the resulting text segments. On the basis that the claim features which relate to the manner how cognitive content (in this case, information such as to enable the user to perform their task more efficiently) is conveyed can contribute to a technical solution to a technical problem, the EPO overturned the decision of the Examining Division and ordered that a patent be granted.
This decision is important since it eases the way for the patenting in Europe of inventions which give a user access to displayed information more readily, even if absent of advantage in the purely technical arena (faster processing, more reliable etc.). It is not necessary for the specification to discuss such advantages since this type of information can be communicated to the EPO during examination. Thus, this decision can be used to advantage with applications which currently are pending before the EPO. The decision is consistent with T643/00 (Searching Image Data/CANON) but distinguishes from T125/04 (Assessment System/COMPARATIVE VISUAL ASSESSMENTS), in which it was decided that conveying information in a manner which a viewer might regard as particularly lucid and logical did not provide a technical solution to a technical problem and thus was not patentable.
For those interested in the facts of the most recent case, the text processing involved folding rules applied to enriched text to produce text segments displayed in new lines with a displacement dependent on speech attributes. The closest prior art disclosed a method for dividing the text of a paragraph into lines having approximately equal lengths in a word processor, for type setting. The Examining Division had decided that the invention was obvious in light of this and ‘the notorious practice of poetry’ (to quote the EPO). Since reading text from a computer screen is different to reading printed text, the technical problem was able to be formulated by the Appeal Board as providing a technical tool for enhancing natural language text presentation on a computer screen. Because the features giving rise to faster reading of natural language text can, according to T641/00 (Two Identities/COMVIK), be taken into account when considering inventive step, the invention was judged not to be obvious.
In some other recent decisions, an Appeal Board decided in favour of Microsoft and granted patents for methods of handling non-file data on a clipboard. The Board decided that the inventions had technical character ‘in that functional data structures were used independently of any cognitive content in order to enhance the internal operation of a computer system with a view to facilitating the exchange of data among various application programs.’ On this basis, the Board decided that the claimed steps which provided a computer with the functionality of assisting a user transferring non-file data into files could be taken into account when considering inventive step. Six related cases (T411/03, T424/03, T425/03, T467/03, T468/03 and T469/03) were decided together.
Paul Derry