The Requirement for an Invention in Patent Law
Table of Contents
The Requirement for an Invention and Concept of Inherent Patentability
The Term 'Invention'
The Origins of the Contemporary (EPC) Definition of 'Invention'
The Uncertainty and Controversy Surrounding the Requirement for an Invention
The Need for a Conception and Epistemology of the InventionL
Formulated in Light of the Purpose of the System, the Meaning of Europeanisation, and Insights from the History and Philosophy of Technology
Part I: The Requirement for an Invention in Historical Perspective
1. The Origins of the Patent as an Exceptional Monopoly Grant: Pre-1623
The Royal Custom of Rewarding the Introduction of New Trades and Devices
The Justification of the Custom in Supporting the Discovery of 'Things Useful for the Public'
The Abuse of the Custom and Intervention of the Common Law
Section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies: The Common Law Invention in its Original Form
2. Inherent Patentability in the Pre-Modern Era of Mechanical and Chemical Manufacture: 1623 to 1882
1623 to 1794: The Post-Specification Invention as an Idea or Discovery
1795 to 1829: The Invention in and after Boulton v Bull
1830 to 1851: The (Patentable) Invention as a Mechanically Inventive Subject Matter
1852 to 1882: The Basis of Losh v Hague in the Requirement for an 'Invention' the Patenting of which is not 'Generally Inconvenient'
3. Inherent Patentability in the Modern Era of New Technologies: 1883 to 1977
1883 to 1959: The Invention as a Manner of New Manufacture, including an Alleged Invention
Post-1959: The Invention as a 'Proper Subject of Letters Patent According to the Principles L Developed for Application of s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies'
Part II: The Requirement for an Invention in the Era of the European Patent Convention
4. The EPC Requirement for an Invention in its Interpretive Context
The EPC Requirement for an Invention in its International and European Statutory Context
The European Framers' Intent Regarding the Requirement for an Invention
The European Framers' Intent Regarding Chemical Product Patents
Other European Perspectives on Chemical Product Patents: A Question of Non-Discrimination
The UK Model of Inherent Patentability at the Time of its Enactment
5. Articles 52(2) and 52(3) EPC According to the EPO
Different Approaches for Different Categories of Subject Matters: 1977 to 1987
Articles 52(2) and 52(3) EPC as a Requirement for Technical Character: 1988 to 1999
Inherent Patentability in an Era of Harmonisation: 1999 to Present
6. Inherent Patentability in UK Law Since the EPC
Different Approaches For Different Categories of Subject Matters: 1977 to 1989
Inherent Patentability as a Fact-Specific Enquiry: Computer-Related Subject Matters after Merrill Lynch
Inherent Patentability as a Requirement for a Subject Matter Sufficiently Supported Qua Invention: Biotechnology after Genentech
Revisiting the Computer Programs Exclusion in Light of Harmonisation: 2005 to Present