T 931/95 - Controlling pension benefits system/PBS PARTNERSHIP
Date of the Decision:
2000-09-08 Headnote:
- Having technical character is an implicit requirement of the EPC to be met by an invention in order to be an invention within the meaning of Article 52(1)EPC. (following decisions T 1173/97 - Computer program product/IBM and T 935/97 - Computer program product II/IBM)
- Methods only involving economic concepts and practices of doing business are not inventions within the meaning of Article 52(1) EPC. A feature of a method which concerns the use of technical means for a purely non-technical purpose and/or for processing purely non-technical information does not necessarily confer a technical character on such a method.
- An apparatus constituting a physical entity or concrete product, suitable for performing or supporting an economic activity, is an invention within the meaning of Article 52(1) EPC.
- There is no basis in the EPC for distinguishing between “new features” of an invention and features of that invention which are known from the prior art when examining whether the invention concerned may be considered to be an invention within the meaning of Article 52(1) EPC.Thus there is no basis in the EPC for applying this so-called contribution approach for this purpose. (following decisions T 1173/97 - Computer program product/IBM and T 935/97 - Computer program product II/IBM)
In this decision the Technical Board of Appeal ruled that although schemes, rules and methods for doing business are excluded from patentability ex article 52(2)© EPC, an apparatus constituting a physical entity for executing such a method is not excluded from patentability.
The rest of the summary will follow later.
This decision has been superseded by T 258/03 - Auction method/HITACHI.