IP Australia (IPA) commissioned the Centre for Transformative Innovation at Swinburne University of Technology to conduct a comparative analysis between computer implemented invention (CII) patenting activities, both the filing of patent applications and their outcomes, in Australia and other jurisdictions (namely, Europe and the United States). This report describes the research methodology and presents the findings of the study.
Key findings
- Computer implemented inventions (CIIs) account for 32% of patent filings in Australia.
- Around 6% of all patent filings in Australia are CII patents at the margins of patent subject matter eligibility – similar to those that receive a manner of manufacture objection in Australia.
- Australia is less likely to grant such applications than the USPTO and more likely to grant such applications than the EPO.
- After first filing at the USPTO applicants are half as likely to file equivalent patents in Australia if the patent is for a CII invention compared to the average patent. However, that effect is partially mitigated if the patent has high economic and technological value.
- The Australian court decision in Research Affiliates vs Commissioner of Patents [2014] reduced the likelihood of past CII applicants to IP Australia filing subsequent CII patents in Australia by up to 23 percentage points. Domestic innovators were among the least impacted in this behaviour.