The Supreme Court presented its view that Japanese patent rights may extend to cross-border acts involving network-related inventions and set forth the criteria for such cases.
We would like to highlight key differences between Japanese patent practice and that of the United States, Canada, and Australia concerning the exceptions to loss of novelty (also referred to as the “grace period”).
The Court determined that the Japan Patent Office (JPO)'s dismissal of an application that listed "DABUS, The invention was autonomously generated by an artificial intelligence" as the name of the inventor, was legitimate.
On July 13, 2021, a request for arbitration in the public interest based on Article 93 of the Patent Law was filed for the first time in Japan; however, the request was withdrawn on May 30, 2024, as a result of settlement.
The Japan Patent Office (JPO) has introduced a measure known as "service by publication" for documents that cannot be delivered to the intended recipient, by instead publishing the relevant information in the Official Gazette and the Patent Gazette, posting the information at the JPO or making the information accessible by other such means.
The Japan Patent Office (JPO), together with the USPTO, the EPO, the CNIPA and the KIPO, has published a comparison table that summarizes the laws, examination guidelines and exemplary cases concerning AI-related inventions, which was approved by the five offices (IP5 Offices) in June 2023.
The Grand Panel found that production of a system composed of a server located abroad and domestic user terminals constituted infringement of Japanese Patent No. 6526304, owned by Dwango, the appellant, the patent being directed to an invention of a system comprising a server and plural terminal devices connected by a network.
