Australia’s Bilski?

Bill Bennett of Australian law firm Pizzeys recently posted an article about a new Australian Patent Office decision governing the patentability of business methods in Australia. 

As Mr. Bennett states in the article, prior to the new decision:

the governing precedent was Grant v Commissioner of Patents [2006].  Grant stood for the proposition that a method must produce “a physical effect in the sense of a concrete effect or phenomenon or manifestation or transformation.” 

In the new case, the Australian Patent Office:

has qualified the “physical effect” requirement by now making it clear that the physical effect must be “central to the purpose or operation of the claimed process or otherwise arises…in a substantial way”.

For the full text of the article and more information, visit the Pizzeys Australian Patent Law Blog by clicking here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s