Spain Espagne Spanien. Report Q180

Spain Espagne Spanien Report Q180 in the name of the Spanish Group by David PELLISE (Chairman), Rafael CASTELLANOS, Josep M. CASTELLO, Eduard FERREGUELA, Isidro José GARCIA EGEA, Manuel ILLESCAS, Jorge LLEVAT, Inmaculada SUAREZ, Antonia TORRENTE, Miguel VIDAL-QUADRAS Content and relevance of industrial applicability and/or utility as requirements for patentability Questions 1. What is the situation in your country? 1.1 Does your country know industrial applicability or utility as an additional requirement for patentability besides novelty and inventive step? Both the current Spanish Law on Patents of 1986 (LP) and the European Patent Convention of 1973 (EPC), in force in Spain from 1986, include industrial application as one of the positive patentability requirements, together with novelty and inventive step. a) As for the LP, section 4.1 provides that Inventions which are susceptible of industrial application, which are new and which involve an inventive step shall be patentable, even when the object for protection is a product being or including biological matter, or a method by which biological matter is produced, transformed or used. This final part of this provision ( even when or used ) has recently been added by the Law 10/2002 of April 29, 2002, which incorporates to the Spanish legal system the Directive 98/44/CE of the European Parliament and the Council, on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. In this sense, it is also interesting to quote the last paragraph of section 5 LP: the industrial application of a whole or partial gene sequence shall be expressly quoted in the patent application. It should be also pointed out that the Spanish LP also regulates utility models as a particular modality for the protection of certain types of inventions. Under section 143 LP, utility models are protected as inventions that are new and involve an inventive step, and that confer on an object a form, structure or constitution that results in an appreciable improvement in its use or manufacture. Although industrial application is not expressly required by the LP for utility models, this requirement has traditionally been considered implicit and consubstantial to utility models. b) On the other hand, the EPC provides in article 52.1 that European patents shall be granted for any inventions which are susceptible of industrial application, which are new and which involve an inventive step. The text of this provision has been modified in the EPC Review Act of November 29, 2000, which was ratified by Spain on November 21, 2002 (Spanish Official Gazette of January 25, 2003). This text, however, is not yet in force due to the fact that the minimum number of Contracting States has not ratified it. The amended text of article 52.1 EPC reads as follows: European patents shall be granted for any inventions, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are susceptible of industrial application. 1

1.2 How does this comply with TRIPS? Both in the LP and the EPC, the provisions of which are older than the TRIPS, the requirements of this agreement are fully incorporated in terms of positive requirements for patentability and, more specifically, as far as industrial application is concerned. In fact, the above mentioned legal texts are consonant with the provisions of the TRIPS, section 27.1: patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application [here the TRIPS further adds an explanatory note stating that the expression capable of industrial application is a synonym of useful. This explanatory note is neither included in the LP nor in the EPC. Also, industrial application is not equivalent to the usefulness requirement in patentable inventions. However, it is beyond any doubt that the LP and the EPC are fully consonant with the TRIPS]. 2. Industrial applicability 2.1 How is industrial applicability defined? Article 9 of the Spanish Patent Law (PL) reproduces literally the definition of the industrial applicability requirement contained in the EPC (Art. 57): An invention shall be considered as susceptible of industrial application if it can be made or used in any kind of industry, including agriculture. In interpreting this regulation it is commonly understood that applicability in the abstract is not enough, rather there must be a possibility of embodiment or specific use. Applicability does not need to be effective, since the potentiality that the invention may be manufactured or used in a certain industrial sector is sufficient. It is considered that the term industry must be interpreted in the broad sense of the word which is advocated by the Paris Union Convention (Art. 1.3), that is to say including not only industry and commerce strictly speaking, but also agricultural and extractive industries, as well as all manufactured and natural products in general. In Spain, it is generally considered that the term industry in this context not only includes the production of goods, but also services. In addition it needs to be taken into consideration that TRIPS stipulates that patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology (Art. 27.1). Furthermore, Spain has ratified the CPE Review Act of the 29 th of November 2000, where it was established that European patents shall be granted for any invention in all technological fields (Art. 52.1). It is a common view that the industrial applicability requirement excludes from patentability those inventions that are not reproducible or could only be applied in the personal or private field of the person in particular. This requirement also excludes non-viable inventions from the point of view of natural laws. It is a widespread opinion, although not a unanimous one, that the industrial application requirement calls for the invention to have a materiality, that is to say it must have an effect on material objects intended for the market. After the 2002 PL reform, the patentability of biotechnological inventions in Spain has become totally clear, since Article 4.1 PL expressly stipulates that the industrial applicability requirement may play a part even if [the inventions] have as an object a product that is composed or contains biological material, or a procedure by means of which biological material is produced, transformed or used. It ought to be remembered that the last paragraph of article 5 PL requires that the industrial application of a total or partial sequence of a gene explicitly appears in the patent application. 2

As far as software is concerned, it is expressly excluded from the concept of the invention due to section 4 of article 4 PL which stipulates that the following shall not be considered as inventions in the sense of the previous sections, in particular: c) computer programs. Section 5 of that same article adds that the provisions in the previous section exclude the patentability of the aforementioned inventions in the same if the object which is applied for comprises one of these inventions. On this point it may be considered more specific the exclusion of patentability contained in the PL than that of the EPC, since the provisions of the latter in its article 52.3 is that it shall exclude patentability of the subject matter or activities referred to in that provision only to the extent to which a European patent application or European patent relates to such subject matter or activities considered as such. The mere use of a computer, network or another programmable device to install software is not enough to make it a patentable material within the current legal framework. On the other hand, computer-implemented inventions where a product is claimed, for example a programmable device or a procedure carried out in a device of these characteristics is deemed patentable. Finally, special mention needs to be made of the methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body. Both the PL (Art. 4.6) and the EPC (Art. 52.4) coincide in expressly excluding their patentability, deeming that they do not meet the necessary industrial applicability requirement. However, at the same time they expressly declare patentable those products (substances, compositions, devices and instruments) for the putting into practice of such methods. For the purpose of the industrial applicability requirement it is unimportant whether the claims of the patent are procedure or product related. 2.2 What is the relevance of industrial applicability and how does it affect granting proceedings? The industrial applicability requirement has very little relevance in Spanish registry practice, bearing in mind, from the outset, PL already previously excludes from the concept of the invention a series of intellectual creations: a) discoveries, scientific theories, and mathematical methods; b) literary and artistic works, or any other aesthetic creation, as well as scientific works; c) Plans, rules and methods designed for intellectual activities, for games or economic-commercial activities, as well as computer programs; and d) Ways of presenting information (Art. 4.4 PL). To this must be added the express exclusion from patentability of methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body (4.6 PL). All these previous exclusions to patentability mean the industrial applicability requirement has very limited prominence in practice. The scarce or almost zero practical incidence of the industrial applicability requirement in the procedures of awarding patents processed by the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office is reflected in the fact that industrial applicability does not even appear explicitly captured in the statistics prepared by this Office on the reasons for the refusal of patents. The Spanish Patent and Trademark Office does not have any criteria on this requirement of patentability, applying, where appropriate, the guidelines of the European Patent Office (EPO). [The Spanish Patent and Trademark Office signed an Agreement with the EPO on the 10 th of February 1999]. 2.3 How is industrial applicability treated in proceedings concerning the validity of patents? For the same reasons outlined in the answer to the previous question, industrial applicability is not usually, per se, a reason used to challenge the award or validity of a patent in judicial proceedings in Spain, meaning that neither is there any jurisprudential criteria set out on this matter. 3

The isolated judicial pronouncements on this subject matter in Spain have been produced with regard to the regulations on patents prior to the current PL, which were those contained in the previous Industrial Property Statute (IPS). More specifically, these limited judicial pronouncements normally refer to the extravagant figure of economic-commercial patents covered by repealed article 47 of the Industrial Property Statute. With regard to this it is worthwhile summarising the decision on the 19 th of July 1999 of the Chamber for Contentious Administrative Proceedings of the Spanish Supreme Court, which confirmed the agreement of the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office refusing a patent relating to a new operational art in the field of life insurance with the object of making it invulnerable and indifferent to the effects which are produced in the same by the devaluation of money. In this decision the Spanish Supreme Court argued as follows: It deals, therefore, with an intellective system outside of the industrial field, since it does not result in material operations embodied in instruments or objects which are capable independently of manipulation in commerce or industry, but rather parameters with arithmetical functions to be developed in insurance policies by means of accounting procedures of deduction and calculation unconnected to the protection of industrial property and more closely related to the protection of intellectual property, as expressly covered in article 4.2.c) of the new PL of 1986. With regard to this, it is not possible to admit the argument of the appellant that the insurance sector fits within industrial activity, with this considered in the broad sense, since although in this way it would be admitted for merely dialectic purposes, it would never be possible to say that the mathematical formulas and procedures in which the object of the patent consists has a material use, by being merely intellective. Both the PL (Art. 112.1.a) and the EPC (Art. 138.1.a) expressly stipulate that it is proper for this court to declare the invalidity of those patents that do not comply with the requirements of patentability, amongst which is industrial applicability. This invalidity of the patents in force in Spain needs to be declared by the Spanish national courts. Those who consider themselves to be harmed by this as well as government departments may seek annulment. The application for annulment may be exercised during the entire life of the patent and during the five years following its expiry (Art. 113 PL). 3. Utility Utility, as an absolute positive patentability requirement, is not to be found specifically taken up in the Spanish patent legislation, nor is it the subject of special consideration in procedures for the grant of patents or in legal proceedings relating to patent validity. Only in the peculiar case of utility models is there the demand that some technical advantage ensue, in relation to the invention specifically claimed (Art. 143.1 PL). Involved, in any event, is a particularity inherent to utility models, foreign to patents of invention regulated by the PL and the EPC. It can be mentioned, in this connection, that the PL, on regulating the grant procedure for patents of invention before the Spanish Patent and Trademarks Office, establishes in articles 37.2 and 40.1 the point that patents are granted without guarantee from the State as far as the utility of the object covered by the patent is concerned. No need, or practical convenience, is at the moment to be seen from introducing, for patents of invention, utility as a patentability requirement in the future. 4. Conclusions The Spanish Group of the AIPPI considers it necessary to maintain the demand for industrial applicability as positive patentability requirement for inventions. This requirement al- 4

lows, inter alia, exclusion from patentability of those inventions not being reproducible or which would only be capable of application in the personal or private sphere of each person in particular, as well as inventions non-viable from the standpoint of the laws of nature. The Spanish Group of the AIPPI proposes a broad meaning where the term industrial is concerned, taking in all areas of technology. The Spanish Group has not achieved a consensus a far as the question is concerned, of whether or not inventions, in order to satisfy the industrial applicability requirement, must necessarily involve material objects intended for the market. As far as the legal definition of the industrial applicability requirement is concerned, the Spanish Group of the AIPPI does not consider entirely satisfactory any of the three variants of the project in article 12.4) of the Treaty on Substantive Patent Law (TSPL) contemplated in OMPI document SCP/9/5. The variant offering less objection to our Group is the one identified as [variant B]: An invention claimed shall have industrial application (will be useful). It will be considered to have industrial application (is useful) if it can be produced or utilized in any type of industry. Industry shall be understood in its broadest sense, as in the Paris Convention. The Spanish Group of the AIPPI proposes, as preferable alternative to this variant, the following wording: An invention claimed shall have industrial application. It shall be considered as having industrial application if it can be carried out or used in any type of industry, without limitation on the technological scope object of application. Résumé Tant l actuelle Loi sur les Brevets d Invention du 1986 que la Convention sur le brevet européen du 1973 (CBE), en vigueur en Espagne depuis 1986, incluent l application industrielle comme une des conditions positives de brevetabilité, en plus de la nouveauté et l activité inventive. Les deux textes légaux, bien qu ils soient antérieurs au TRIPS, ils s adaptent pleinement aux exigences de ce dernier en matière de conditions positives de brevetabilité en général, et concrètement, en ce qui concerne la condition d application industrielle. Or, la condition d application industrielle n équivaut pas en Espagne à une exigence d utilité des inventions brevetables. En fait, l utilité ne constitue pas dans notre pays une condition de brevetabilité. La condition de l application industrielle est définie dans l article 9 LP avec des termes analogues à l article 57 CBE: une invention est considerée comme susceptible d application industrielle quand son objet peut être fabriqué ou être utilisé dans tout genre d industrie, y compris l agriculture. Le terme industrie doit être interprété au sens large, compréhensif de tous les domaines technologiques. La condition d application industrielle permet d exclure de brevetabilité, parmi d autres, ces inventions qui ne sont pas reproductibles ou qui pourraient uniquement être appliquées dans la sphère personnelle ou privée de chaque personne en particulier. Cette condition permet aussi d exclure les inventions non viables du point de vue des lois de la nature. Tant lors du dépôt du brevet que dans la pratique judiciaire, la condition d application industrielle a une faible importance en Espagne, étant donné que tant la LP comme la CBE excluent tout d abord la brevetabilité d une série de créations intellectuelles (les programmes d ordinateur, les méthodes économique-commerciales, les méthodes de traitement chirurgical ou thérapeutique, etc...). 5

Le Groupe Espagnol de l AIPPI considère qu il est nécessaire de maintenir l exigence de l application industrielle en tant que condition positive de brevetabilité des inventions, et préconise à ce sujet une vaste conception du terme industriel, compréhensif de tous les domaines téchnologiques. Zusammenfassung Das spanische Patentgesetz aus dem Jahre 1986 (Ley de Patentes, LP) wie auch das Europäische Patentübereinkommen (EPÜ) aus dem Jahre 1973, das in Spanien seit 1986 in Kraft ist, beinhalten - neben der Neuheit und der erfinderischen Tätigkeit - das Erfordernis der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit als positive Voraussetzung für die Patentierbarkeit. Beide Gesetzestexte entsprechen - auch wenn sie vor dem TRIPS entstanden sind - voll und ganz den im TRIPS enthaltenen Forderungen in Sachen positiver Erfordernisse für die Patentierbarkeit allgemein sowie insbesondere hinsichtlich des Erfordernisses der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit. Allerdings entspricht das Erfordernis der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit in Spanien nicht der Anforderung der Nützlichkeit einer patentierbaren Erfindung. Tatsächlich stellt die Nützlichkeit einer Erfindung in Spanien keine Bedingung für die Patentierbarkeit dar. Das Erfordernis der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit ist in Artikel 9 LP definiert und entspricht analog dem Artikel 57 des EPÜ, wo es wörtlich heisst: Eine Erfindung gilt als gewerblich anwendbar, wenn ihr Gegenstand auf irgendeinem gewerblichen Gebiet einschliesslich der Landwirtschaft hergestellt oder benutzt werden kann. Der Ausdruck gewerbliches Gebiet muss dabei im weiteren Sinne interpretiert werden und sollte alle technologischen Bereiche einschliessen. Das Erfordernis der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit erlaubt es, von der Patentierbarkeit diejenigen Erfindungen auszuschliessen, die nicht reproduzierbar sind oder die ausschliesslich im persönlichen oder privaten Bereich jedes Einzelnen zur Anwendung gelangen können. Ausgeschlossen werden können somit auch diejenigen Erfindungen, die unter dem Aspekt der Naturgesetze nicht zu verwirklichen sind. In der spanischen Patentpraxis und Rechtsprechung hat das Erfordernis der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit nur eine sehr geringe Bedeutung, insbesondere weil sowohl gemäss LP als auch gemäss EPÜ eine ganze Reihe von geistigen Schöpfungen (Computerprogramme, wirtschaftlichgesellschaftliche Methoden, chirurgische oder therapeutische Behandlungsmethoden usw.) von der Patentierbarkeit von vornherein ausgeschlossen werden. Die Spanische Gruppe der AIPPI hält es daher für erforderlich, das Erfordernis der gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit als positive Anforderung für die Patentierbarkeit von Erfindungen beizubehalten und tritt dafür ein, den Begriff gewerblich so weit zu fassen, dass er alle technologischen Bereiche umfasst. 6