Section 3(k) | Intellepedia

Patent Application for System to Locate Users on P2P Networks Refused under Section 3(k)

Wooden cylinders with letters "P2P" symbolizing peer-to-peer networks, placed on a background of dollar bills. Wooden cylinders with letters "P2P" symbolizing peer-to-peer networks, placed on a background of dollar bills.

The Delhi High Court has upheld the refusal of a patent application for a system that locates users on peer-to-peer networks. The Court ruled that the invention was a computer program per se, excluded from patentability under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act.

Indian Patent Office Issues Draft CRI Guidelines 2025 – Version 2.0: Key Additions and Changes

A digital illustration showing a polygonal human face on the left, facing a blue background filled with interconnected binary digits and nodes, with bold text in the center reading “Draft CRI guidelines Version 2.0.”

Version 2.0 of the Draft CRI Guidelines 2025 introduces updated examination procedures for AI, blockchain, and quantum-based inventions, and includes an extensive annexure of examples clarifying Section 3(k) exclusions.

Billing and Usage Data Invention Not a Business Method Under Section 3(k) of Patents Act

A smiling woman in an office uses billing software on her computer, with a large “PATENTED” seal displayed over the screen, signifying the billing software has received patent protection.

The Madras High Court has ruled in favour of Tekelec Inc., setting aside the rejection of its patent application under Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act. The Court found the invention addressed a technical problem and did not constitute a business method, ordering a reassessment limited to software-related exclusions.

From Algorithms To AI: Patentability Under The 2025 CRI Draft Guidelines

The 2025 Draft CRI Guidelines issued by the Indian Patent Office refine the criteria for patentability of Computer Related Inventions (CRIs), emphasizing technical effect, inventive step, sufficiency of disclosure, and proper claim drafting for AI, blockchain, and emerging technologies.

Evaluation of Technical Advancement and Compliance with CRI Guidelines under Indian Patent Law

The Madras High Court allowed Idemia Identity & Security France’s appeal, setting aside a refusal order under Section 3(k) for a cryptography patent. The Court ruled the order as a non-speaking one and in violation of natural justice. It directed fresh consideration of the matter, emphasizing technical contributions and adherence to CRI and European guidelines.

Blackberry blacks out in case relating to patentability of algorithmic processes

The Delhi High Court dismissed Blackberry’s appeal against refusal of its patent application, holding that algorithmic processes remain excluded from patent protection under Indian law. The decision clarifies the interpretation of Section 3k with respect to software and computer-related inventions.

Computer Programs with Technical Effect such as enhancing speed and efficiency are patentable, reiterates the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has confirmed that computer programs with demonstrable technical effect, such as improving speed or efficiency, may be patentable under Indian law. This decision aligns Indian patent jurisprudence with international standards and clarifies the scope of Section 3(k).

Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

The Madras High Court condemned the Patent Office’s reliance on outdated CRI guidelines in Microsoft’s patent application case, highlighting the significance of technical effect in computer related inventions. The court allowed the appeal and directed a new evaluation.

A Deep Dive into Section 3(k) Analysis of Ericsson’s Eight Patents – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part VII

The Delhi High Court analysed the validity of eight Ericsson patents under Section 3(k), following Lava’s challenge. Except for the first patent, the Court upheld the remaining patents, finding them to involve technical advancements beyond mere algorithms or mathematical methods.

SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

This post discusses the Delhi High Court’s approach to awarding actual costs in the Ericsson v Lava standard essential patent litigation. It outlines the legal principles applied and analyses the Court’s reasoning, focusing on party conduct and litigation strategy in determining cost awards.