Search results for: patentability

Authors: Stefan Papastefanou

Abstract:

Artificial intelligence (AI) is an interdisciplinary field of computer science with the aim of creating intelligent machine behavior. Early approaches to AI have been configured to operate in very constrained environments where the behavior of the AI system was previously determined by formal rules. Knowledge was presented as a set of rules that allowed the AI system to determine the results for specific problems; as a structure of if-else rules that could be traversed to find a solution to a particular problem or question. However, such rule-based systems typically have not been able to generalize beyond the knowledge provided. All over the world and especially in IT-heavy industries such as the United States, the European Union, Singapore, and China, machine learning has developed to be an immense asset, and its applications are becoming more and more significant. It has to be examined how such products of machine learning models can and should be protected by IP law and for the purpose of this paper patent law specifically, since it is the IP law regime closest to technical inventions and computing methods in technical applications. Genetic breeding models are currently less popular than recursive neural network method and deep learning, but this approach can be more easily described by referring to the evolution of natural organisms, and with increasing computational power; the genetic breeding method as a subset of the evolutionary algorithms models is expected to be regaining popularity. The research method focuses on patentability (according to the world’s most significant patent law regimes such as China, Singapore, the European Union, and the United States) of AI inventions and machine learning. Questions of the technical nature of the problem to be solved, the inventive step as such, and the question of the state of the art and the associated obviousness of the solution arise in the current patenting processes. Most importantly, and the key focus of this paper is the problem of patenting inventions that themselves are developed through machine learning. The inventor of a patent application must be a natural person or a group of persons according to the current legal situation in most patent law regimes. In order to be considered an 'inventor', a person must actually have developed part of the inventive concept. The mere application of machine learning or an AI algorithm to a particular problem should not be construed as the algorithm that contributes to a part of the inventive concept. However, when machine learning or the AI algorithm has contributed to a part of the inventive concept, there is currently a lack of clarity regarding the ownership of artificially created inventions. Since not only all European patent law regimes but also the Chinese and Singaporean patent law approaches include identical terms, this paper ultimately offers a comparative analysis of the most relevant patent law regimes.

Keywords: algorithms, inventor, genetic breeding models, machine learning, patentability

Procedia PDF Downloads 108

Authors: E. Prema

Abstract:

Biotechnology is a study relating to the practical application of living beings in different fields. Generally, it is a study with regard to living organisms in the industrial utilization. It is the technology, which uses living organisms or its parts for specific commercial use. Modification and application of living beings for different practical purposes is possible through biotechnology. Furthermore, today biotechnology is being used in different fields for better results. It is worthwhile to note here that biotechnology is one of the most innovative and intensive industries. It has used the genetically based characteristics in microorganisms, plants and animals to create drugs and to develop drug therapies, which may prevent, cure or alleviate disease and their symptoms. Drugs are basically chemicals and while patenting drugs, the conditions of patentability of chemicals and the types that can be patented are equally applicable to drugs also. Nowadays, the role of biotechnology for manufacturing drugs has assumed much importance because of intellectual property rights. By way using biotechnology, most of the pharmaceutical inventions are getting protection for the period of 20 years as per the Patents Act, 1970 as amended in 2005. There is no doubt that biotechnology is serving the public at large with regard manufacturing drugs and helping the needy people on time.

Keywords: biotechnology, drugs, intellectual property rights, patents

Procedia PDF Downloads 454

Authors: Valery Yakubovich, Shuping wu

Abstract:

Organization theorists have long claimed that organizational innovations are nontechnological, in part because they are unpatentable. The claim rests on the assumption that organizational innovations are abstract ideas embodied in persons and contexts rather than in context-free practical tools. However, over the last three decades, organizational knowledge has been increasingly embodied in digital tools which, in principle, can be patented. To provide the first empirical evidence regarding the patentability of organizational innovations, we trained two machine learning algorithms to identify a population of 205,434 patent applications for organizational technologies (OrgTech) and, among them, 141,285 applications that use organizational innovations accumulated over the 20th century. Our event history analysis of the probability of patenting an OrgTech invention shows that ideas from organizational innovations decrease the probability of patent allowance unless they describe a practical tool. We conclude that the present-day digital transformation places organizational innovations in the realm of high tech and turns the debate about organizational technologies into the challenge of designing practical organizational tools that embody big ideas about organizing. We outline an agenda for patent-based research on OrgTech as an emerging phenomenon.

Keywords: organizational innovation, organizational technology, high tech, patents, machine learning

Procedia PDF Downloads 122

Authors: Muhammad Danyal Khan

Abstract:

The standards of patentability are drawing a great impact upon medicine industry of Pakistan which is indirectly troubling the right to health of ordinary citizen. Globalization of intellectual property laws is directly impacting access to medicine for population in Pakistan. Pakistan has enacted Patent Ordinance 2000 to develop the standards of Patent laws in consonance with international commitments. Moreover, Pakistan is signatory to UN Millennium Development Goals (2000-2015), and three of them directly put stress upon the health standards. This article will provide a critical brief about implications of TRIPS Agreement on standards of health in Pakistan and will also propose a futuristic approach for the pharmaceutical industry. This paper will define the paradox of globalization and national preparedness on pharmaceutical patents utilizing industry statistics and case laws from Pakistan. Moreover, this work will contribute towards debate on access to medicine at legislative and interpretative levels that will further help development of equilibrium between pharmaceutical patents and right to health.

Keywords: TRIPS (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights), patents, compulsory licensing, patent, lifesaving drugs, WTO, infringement

Procedia PDF Downloads 215

Authors: Xiangjun Kong, Dongning Yao, Yuanjia Hu

Abstract:

Therapeutic antibodies have become the most valuable and successful class of biopharmaceutical drugs, with a huge market potential and therapeutic advantages. Antibody patents are, accordingly, extremely important. As the technological limitation of the early stage of this field, the U. S. Patent and Trademark Offices (USPTO) have issued guidelines that suggest an exception for patents claiming a genus of antibodies that bind to a novel antigen, even in the absence of any experimental antibody production. This 'antibody exception' allowed for a broad scope on antibody claims, and led a global trend to patent antibodies without antibodies. Disputes around the pertinent patentability and written description issues remain particularly intense. Yet the validity of such patents had not been overtly challenged until Centocor v. Abbott, which restricted the broad scope of antibody patents and hit the brakes on the 'antibody exception'. The courts tend to uphold the requirement for adequate description of antibodies in the patent specifications, to avoid overreaching antibody claims. Patents following the 'antibody exception' are at risk of being found invalid for inadequately describing what they have claimed. However, the relation between the court and USPTO guidelines remains obscure, and the waning of the 'antibody exception' has led to further disputes around antibody patents. This uncertainty clearly affects patent applications, antibody innovations, and even relevant business performance. This study will give an overview of the emergence, debate, and waning usage of the 'antibody exception' in a number of enlightening cases, attempting to understand the specific concerns and the potential influence of antibody patents. We will then provide some possible strategies for antibody patenting, under the current considerations on the 'antibody exception'.

Keywords: antibody exception, antibody patent, USPTO (U. S. Patent and Trademark Offices) guidelines, written description requirement

Procedia PDF Downloads 158