Non-Patentable Inventions in India
We will delve into the world of non-patentable inventions in India under the Indian patent law. Understanding the specific exceptions and criteria is essential for inventors and businesses seeking intellectual property protection for their innovations.
Section 3(a): Frivolous Inventions or Inventions Contrary to Well-Established Natural Laws
Section 3(a) of the Indian Patent Act states that an invention is non-patentable if it is frivolous, or if it claims anything that is obviously contrary to well-established natural laws.
Example 1: A Perpetual Motion Machine
A device that claims to generate perpetual motion, in violation of the laws of thermodynamics, is non-patentable in India as it contradicts well-established natural laws.
Example 2: A Time Travel Device
A device that claims to enable time travel, which contradicts the fundamental principles of physics, is non-patentable in India as it goes against well-established natural laws.
Section 3(b): Inventions Contrary to Public Order and Morality
Any invention that is considered contrary to public order or morality, or that could harm human, animal, or plant life, is non-patentable under Section 3(b) of the Indian Patent Act.
Example 1: A Weapon of Mass Destruction
A new technology designed to create weapons of mass destruction would not be eligible for a patent in India, as it is considered contrary to public order and morality.
Example 2: A Genetically Modified Organism with Harmful Effects
A genetically modified organism that poses a significant threat to human health or the environment is non-patentable in India, as it goes against public interest and morality.
Section 3(c): Mere Discovery of a Scientific Principle or Formulation
The mere discovery of a scientific principle or formulation of an abstract theory is non-patentable under Section 3(c) of the Indian Patent Act.
Example 1: A New Scientific Principle
If a scientist discovers a new principle governing the behavior of a natural phenomenon, it cannot be patented in India, as it is considered a mere discovery.
Example 2: A Formulation of an Abstract Theory
An abstract theory or concept, such as a new mathematical theorem or an innovative business strategy, is non-patentable in India, as it falls under the category of mere discovery.
Section 3(d): Derivatives of Known Substances
Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act states that a new form of a known substance, which does not result in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance, is non-patentable. In other words, for a new form of a known substance to be patentable, it must demonstrate a significant improvement in its efficacy compared to the original substance. This is particularly relevant in the pharmaceutical industry, where the development of new forms of known drugs, such as salts, esters, and polymorphs, is commonplace.
Example 1: A New Salt of a Known Drug
Suppose a pharmaceutical company develops a new salt form of a known drug. This new salt form exhibits similar therapeutic efficacy as the original drug, but it has improved solubility and absorption. In this case, the new salt form would not be patentable under Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act, as the improved solubility and absorption do not directly translate into enhanced therapeutic efficacy.
Example 2: A Polymorph of a Known Drug
A pharmaceutical company discovers a new polymorph of a known drug. A polymorph is a different crystalline form of the same compound, which can exhibit different physical properties, such as solubility and stability. If the new polymorph does not demonstrate a significant improvement in therapeutic efficacy compared to the original form, it would be considered non-patentable under Section 3(d).
Implications of Section 3(d) for the Pharmaceutical Industry
Section 3(d) plays a crucial role in preventing the practice of "evergreening" in the pharmaceutical industry. Evergreening is a strategy used by some pharmaceutical companies to extend the patent life of their products by making minor modifications to the original compound without significant improvements in efficacy. By imposing strict criteria for patentability under Section 3(d), the Indian Patent Act ensures that only genuinely innovative pharmaceutical inventions receive patent protection.
Furthermore, Section 3(d) promotes the availability of affordable generic drugs in the Indian market by limiting the patentability of minor modifications to known drugs. This helps maintain a balance between promoting innovation in the pharmaceutical sector and ensuring access to essential medicines for the Indian population.
Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act plays a critical role in shaping the landscape of pharmaceutical innovation in India. By setting stringent criteria for the patentability of new forms of known substances, it encourages genuine innovation while safeguarding public health interests.
Section 3(e): Mere Admixture of Known Substances
Section 3(e) of the Indian Patent Act states that a mere admixture of known substances resulting in a simple aggregation of their properties is not eligible for a patent.
Example 1: A New Paint Mixture
If a new paint mixture is created by combining existing paint colors without any significant improvement in properties or functionality, it cannot be patented in India.
Example 2: A Cosmetic Product
A cosmetic product made by mixing various known ingredients without exhibiting any synergistic effect or improved properties is non-patentable in India.
Section 3(f): Mere Arrangement or Re-arrangement of Known Devices
An invention that consists only of the arrangement or re-arrangement of known devices, each functioning independently of one another in their normal way, is non-patentable under Section 3(f) of the Indian Patent Act.
Example 1: A Combination of Existing Electronic Devices
A product that merely combines existing electronic devices, such as a smartphone, camera, and GPS device, without any novel functional integration, is non-patentable in India.
Example 2: A New Configuration of Known Machines
A new configuration of known machines, such as an assembly line with no novel features or improvements, is non-patentable in India under Section 3(f).
Section 3(g): Substances Obtained by Mere Admixture
Section 3(g) of the Indian Patent Act states that substances obtained by mere admixture, resulting only in the aggregation of the properties of the components, or a process for producing such substances, are non-patentable.
Example 1: A Mixture of Chemicals
A mixture of chemicals that does not result in any synergistic effect or improved properties is non-patentable in India.
Example 2: A Process for Producing an Admixture
A process developed for producing an admixture of known substances that does not yield any new properties or effects is non-patentable in India.
Section 3(h): Mere Discovery of Any New Property or New Use for a Known Substance
The mere discovery of any new property or new use for a known substance is non-patentable under Section 3(h) of the Indian Patent Act.
Example 1: A New Use for a Known Chemical
If a known chemical is discovered to have a new use, such as a new medical application, it is non-patentable in India.
Example 2: A New Property of an Existing Material
The discovery of a new property, such as enhanced electrical conductivity, in an existing material is non-patentable in India.
Section 3(i): Methods of Treatment
Methods of treatment of humans or animals are non-patentable under Section 3(i) of the Indian Patent Act. This includes surgical, therapeutic, and diagnostic methods.
Example 1: A Surgical Procedure
A new surgical procedure developed to treat a specific medical condition is non-patentable in India, as it falls under methods of treatment.
Example 2: A Diagnostic Technique
A new diagnostic technique designed to detect a specific disease is not eligible for a patent in India, as it is considered a method of treatment.
Section 3(j): Plants, Animals, and Biological Processes
Section 3(j) of the Indian Patent Act excludes plants, animals, and biological processes from patent eligibility. This includes any plant or animal varieties, seeds, and any biological processes for their production.
Example 1: A New Plant Variety
If a new plant variety is developed through traditional breeding methods, it cannot be patented in India. However, it may be eligible for protection under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act.
Example 2: A Biological Process for Producing a New Animal Breed
A process developed to produce a new animal breed through biological means is non-patentable in India, as it falls under the category of biological processes.
Section 3(k): Computer Programs, Algorithms, and Business Methods
Section 3(k) of the Indian Patent Act states that mathematical methods, business methods, computer programs per se, and algorithms are non-patentable. This provision aims to strike a balance between promoting innovation in the field of software development and ensuring that abstract ideas and basic building blocks of computer technology remain in the public domain.
Example 1: A Mathematical Algorithm
A mathematical algorithm, such as a new technique for solving linear equations, is non-patentable under Section 3(k) of the Indian Patent Act, as it is considered an abstract idea and part of the fundamental knowledge in the field of mathematics.
Example 2: A Computer Program
A computer program, such as an application that performs basic arithmetic operations, is non-patentable under Section 3(k) of the Indian Patent Act. However, it is essential to note that the term "computer programs per se" has been subject to interpretation, and software inventions may still be patentable if they meet specific criteria.
Patentability of Computer-Related Inventions in India
Although Section 3(k) explicitly states that computer programs per se are non-patentable, the Indian Patent Office has issued guidelines for the examination of computer-related inventions. According to these guidelines, software inventions may be patentable if they demonstrate a technical advancement or solve a technical problem through the application of the computer program.
Example 1: A Software-Hardware Combination
A software invention that controls a novel robotic arm mechanism, enabling it to perform complex tasks with high precision, may be patentable in India. In this case, the software is functionally linked to the hardware, and the invention demonstrates a technical improvement in the field of robotics.
Example 2: A Computer Program with a Technical Effect
A computer program that optimizes the performance of a computer's central processing unit (CPU) by intelligently allocating resources based on the user's needs may be patentable in India. The program exhibits a technical effect by improving the efficiency and performance of the CPU.
Section 3(k) of the Indian Patent Act plays a crucial role in determining the patentability of computer-related inventions in India. By striking a balance between fostering innovation in the software industry and preserving the public domain's fundamental knowledge, it encourages the development of novel and inventive software solutions with tangible technical effects.
Section 3(l): Inventions Related to Traditional Knowledge
Section 3(l) of the Indian Patent Act states that inventions that are based on traditional knowledge are non-patentable. Traditional knowledge refers to the long-standing information, practices, and innovations passed down through generations within a community. This knowledge often pertains to agriculture, medicine, and biodiversity, among other fields.
Example 1: A Traditional Herbal Remedy
A traditional herbal remedy used by indigenous communities to treat a specific ailment is non-patentable in India, as it is considered traditional knowledge. However, it may be eligible for protection under the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library, which is an initiative by the Indian government to document and protect traditional knowledge.
Example 2: An Agricultural Practice
An age-old agricultural practice, such as crop rotation or the use of specific farming techniques, passed down through generations is non-patentable in India under Section 3(l), as it falls within the realm of traditional knowledge.
Section 3(m): Methods of Agriculture and Horticulture
Methods of agriculture and horticulture are non-patentable under Section 3(m) of the Indian Patent Act.
Example 1: A New Irrigation Technique
A new irrigation technique designed to improve water distribution to crops is non-patentable in India, as it falls under the category of methods of agriculture.
Example 2: A Horticultural Pruning Method
A new method of pruning plants to optimize growth and yield is non-patentable in India, as it is considered a method of horticulture.
Section 3(n): Topography of Integrated Circuits
The topography of integrated circuits is non-patentable under Section 3(n) of the Indian Patent Act. However, protection for the layout design of integrated circuits can be sought under the Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act.
Example 1: A Layout Design for a Microprocessor
A layout design for a microprocessor, which is an essential part of an integrated circuit, is non-patentable in India under the patent law but can be protected under the Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act.
Example 2: A Memory Chip Topography
The topography of a memory chip, another crucial element of an integrated circuit, is non-patentable in India but can seek protection under the Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act.
Section 3(o): Literary, Dramatic, Musical, or Artistic Work
Literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work, including cinematographic works and television productions, are non-patentable under Section 3(o) of the Indian Patent Act. These works can be protected under copyright law.
Example 1: A Novel
A novel, which is a literary work, is non-patentable in India. However, it can be protected under copyright law.
Example 2: A Musical Composition
A musical composition, including the melody and lyrics, is non-patentable in India but can be protected under copyright law.
Section 3(p): Inventions Relating to Atomic Energy
Inventions related to atomic energy are non-patentable under Section 3(p) of the Indian Patent Act. The patenting of such inventions is governed by the Atomic Energy Act.
Example 1: A Nuclear Reactor Design
A new design for a nuclear reactor used in generating atomic energy is non-patentable in India under the patent law but may be subject to regulations under the Atomic Energy Act.
Example 2: A Process for Enriching Uranium
A process for enriching uranium, which is essential for the production of atomic energy, is non-patentable in India and is governed by the Atomic Energy Act.