Evaluation system of patent criteria in Iranian law

Document Type : Scientific research

Authors

• Sanaz Alaee ¹
• Morteza Asadlou Gharakhanloo ²
• Mokhtar Naam ³

¹ 1-PhD student, Department of private law, Aras international Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

² Assistant professor, Department of private law, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

³ Assistant professor, Department of private law, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22067/economlaw.2025.88651.1377

Abstract

A patent is a privilege given by governments to innovators to create a new and economically important invention. For patenting of invention predict some rules in Iran. Some of these rules are substantive codition. Some of these conditions are novelty, industrial application and inventive step. That lack of these substantive conditions create difficulty for recognizing and supporting of patents. Also, some of these rules are procedural conditions. They are refer to prepare of statement and appendices and description of invention and claims. that the lack of these conditions can cause the invention not to be patented in some cases. but they are not as important as substantive conditions. In some international documents in the field of industrial property rights especially in the Trips Agreement, the substantive conditions of patent are stated. According to paragraph 1 of article 27 of the Trips Agreement, for patenting of any inventions, either product or process, predict some substantive conditions. These substantive conditions are:
Novelty: It means that the invention was not predicted in prior art or industry.
Invention step: It means that the invention does not be obvious and clear for a person with the ordinary skills.
Industrial practical: It means that the invention can be made or used in the field of industry or art. This Agreement has only stated these substantive conditions and assessment of these conditions is left to the internal regulations of the countries. Due to this, the regulations of the countries have the flexibility to evaluate those conditions according to their economic and social conditions and that is an important point for these countries. But the lack of definition of invention in the Trips agreement also the lack of explanation of the substantive conditions of the patent, caused countries to reach different results in the assessment of inventions. This problem has forced developed countries and consequently the world intellectual property organization to take serious measures in order to formulate the substantive laws of inventions and make them uniform in terms of substance. In Europe, according to the European patent convention 1973, In article 54 to 57 of this convention, patent conditions are newly, inventive step, and industrial practical. In the laws and regulations related to the inventions of countries, including developing and developed countries, usually these substantive conditions are stated. In the Irans patent law 1310, some of these conditions, including novelty ate mentioned. In the patent law of Iran 1386, in article 1 the invention is defined. Subsequently, in article 2, the conditions of patentable inventions are stated. And necessary criteria for patenting are novelty, innovative step and industrial application. But if the subject of the intended invention is one of the excluded subjects, it will not be able to be patented. In the continuation of this article, the concept of these conditions and the evaluation of these conditions and criteria in Iranian law will be discussed.

Keywords

• Industrial application
• Inventive step
• Novelty
• Patent

Main Subjects

• Intellectual Property Law

References

•   

  • Abbasi, S.; Akhgar, B. (2012). Management of intellectual property: Invention, Trademarks, Industrial plans (1rd ed.). Tehran: Jangal Publication. (In Persian).
  • Bagheri, K.; Kebriaei, M.; Azizi Moradpoory, H. (2012). Public access to Iran's invention information, why and how. Specialized Magazine of Parks and Growth Centers, 8(30), 40-63. (In Persian).
  • Bagheri, K. (2013). An analytical look at the performance of Iran's patent system. Approach Journal, 55, 1-30. (In Persian).
  • commission of the European communities. (1973). The new European patent law,the main features of the two European patent conventions. (Office for official publication of the European communities No.)
  • Connor, E.; Baccelli, M.; Wezenbeek, B.; Bouwelen,F.; Lorenz,M.; Muller,M.; Vocke,H.; Prub,T.; Osterrieth, J. (2022). Driven by technology: patenting before the European patent office. Hoffmann Eitle Quarterly, 4(2), 1-20. http://www.hoffmanneitle.com/en/legal-notice/
  • Daniel, C.; Gaten, B. (2012). The European patent office, an introduction to patent in Europe.(European patent office (EPO) publication). http://epo.org/european patent office.pdf
  • Ebrahimi, M. (2010). Measuring the strength of Iran's patent laws. Legal Research Journal, 19, 1-25. (In Persian).
  • European patent office (EPO) as designated or elected office. (2013). PCT applicant's Guide, 1-44.
  • Faramarzi, N.; Bagheri Fard, A. A. (2018). Support for new technologies is an undeniable requirement. National Conference of Humanities Scientific Studies and Researches . Tehran. Iran. 2018. (In Persian).
  • Ghasemi, A. (2015). Easy patent training, commercialization, branding (1rd ed.). Tehran: Work and University Publication. (In Persian).
  • German patent and trademark office.(2022).Patents.(German patent and trademark office publication No.80331) http://www.dpma.de/english
  • Golchehreh, L.; Kane, J. (2020). United states mission to the European union Intellectual property toolkit. http://www.buyusa.gov/europe
  • Habiba, S.; Bahadori Jahromi, Z. (2014). An innovative step in nanotechnology inventions. Business Research Journal, 73, 51-77. (In Persian).
  • Habiba, S.; Nazeri, A. (2021). A competent person to file a lawsuit for revocation of a patent certificate. Legal Encyclopedias Journal, 4(13), 60-81. (In Persian).
  • Hakimi Elahi, Gh. H.; Khan Chamani, J.; Kiani Bakhtiary, A.; Mousavi Movahedi, A. A. (2005). Methods and strategies of patenting and its privileges from a legal point of view. Approach Journal, 34, 100-123. (In Persian).
  • Hess, P.; Muller-stoy, T.; Wintermeier,M. (2014). Are patents merely "paper Triger"? Patent Journal, 8(2), 1-33.
  • Jafarzadeh, M. GH.; Mahmoudi, A. (2016). The substantive conditions for protection of patents from the point of view of the judicial procedure and the patent office. Legal Research Journal, 42, 1-45. (In Persian).
  • Jafarzadeh, M. GH.; Seiedin, A. (2019). Amicable deadline for disclosure in patent rights. Private Law Research Journal, 7(27), 30-51. (In Persian).
  • Mcleland, L. N. (2002). What every Chemist should know about patents.ACS Joint Board-council committee on patents and Relate matters, 1-21.
  • Mir Hosseini, H. (2008). Patent rights (1rd ed.). Tehran: Mizan Publication. (In Persian).
  • Mir Shamsi, M. H.; Nazeri, A. (2019). The impact of revocation of the patent certificate on the contracts with regard to the necessity of the patent rights. Business Research Journal, 90, 1-20. (In Persian).
  • Nader Ali, E. (2019). Comparative study and determination of innovative step in inventions. National conference of new and creative ideas in management, accounting legal and social studies. Tehran. Iran. 2019. (In Persian).
  • Najafi, H. (2013). The legal structure and procedure of patent offices; Emphasizing the pathology of evaluating innovative steps in Iran's patent office. Eminence of Rights Journal, 1(5), 50-74. (In Persian).
  • Najafi, H.; Madani, M. (2014). The substantive condition of an innovative step in the mirror of laws and regulations. Legal Research Publication, 25, 20-44. (In Persian).
  • Najafi, H.; Madani, M. (2016). The condition of an innovative step in Iran's patent system. Legal Research Journal, 30(2), 30-53. ( In Persian).
  • Najafi, H.; Madani, M. (2018). Clarifying the means of meeting the condition of innovativeness in patent law; previous art or industry, a person of ordinary skill in knowledge. Legal Research Journal, 34, 20-48. (In Persian). DOI: 10.48300/jlr.2018.67522
  • Nasr Abadi, A. (2005). Substantive conditions of patent recognition, comparative review in Iranian law and Trips agreement. Legal Justice Journal, 51, 1-26. (In Persian).
  • Policy department citizens rights and constitutional affairs.(2015).The European patent office state of play.(Publication OfficeNo. PE10.208) European parliament.http: //europarl. europa.eu/studies 
  • Rubisz, S. (2022). The European patent with unitary effect, opportunities and limitations for innovative projects. Scientific Quarterly,1(57),114-128.
  • Sadeghi, M.; Amini, M. (2012). Causes and effects of patent certificate revocation. Comparative Law Studies Journal, 3(1), 60-87. (In Persian).
  • Sadeghi, M.; Johari, M. (2012). Beneficiary in lawsuits arising from the invention, from the point of view of the law and judicial procedure. Jurisprudence Views Journal, 59, 1-22. (In Persian).
  • Sadeghi, M.; Najafi, H.; Madani, M. (2013). Pathology of the innovative step condition in the patent system. Law and Political Sciences Journal, 43(1), 60-83. (In Persian).
  • Sadeghi, M.; Ramezani Akordi, H. (2015). A comparative study of the concept and effects of the right of priority in patent law. Comparative Law Research Journal, 19(1), 60-86. (In Prsian).
  • Sadeghi, M.; Najafi, H. (2016). A comparative study of the condition of industrial use in patent law. Comparative Research of Islamic and Western Laws Journal, 3(1), 80-104. (In Persian).
  • Salehi Zahabi, J. (2009). Patents, a comparative perspective (1rd ed.). Tehran: Publishing Company Publication. (In Persian).
  • Salehi Zahabi, J. (2010). Novelty is the characteristic of every invention. Faculty of Law and Political Sciences Journal, 40(4), 80-103. (In Persian).
  • Scellato,G.; Calderini,M.; caviggioli,F.; Franzoni,C.; Ughetto,E.; Kica,E.;  Rodriguez,V. (2011). Study on the quality of the patent system in Europe. Official Journal of the European Union, 2(1), 1-194.
  • Sheikhi, M. (2013). Legislative strategies in industrial property rights (1rd ed.). Tehran: Khorshidi Publication. (In Persisn).
  • Shobeiri, H.; Najafi, H.(2011). A comparative study of evaluating and verifying the innovative step in inventions. Comparative Law Research Journal, 15(4), 20-45.(In Persian).
  • Shobeiri, H.; Najafi, H. (2013). A comparative study of the substantive condition of the innovative step in the patent. Comparative Law Journal, 100(2), 100-123. (In Persian).
  • Shobeiri, H.; Dehghani, A. (2015). A comparative study of the uniqueness condition in industrial designs and its comparison with the condition of originality. Comparative Law Research Journal, 19(2), 20-48. (In Persian).
  • Singleton, J. (2000). convention on the Grant of European patents (European patent convention) and convention for the European patent for the common market (community patent convention). International Lawyer Journal, 3(8), 119-140
  • Taban, M. R. (2013). Guide to drafting a patent application (1rd ed.). Shiraz: Navid Shiraz Publication. (In Persian).
  • The house of commons European scrutiny committee. (2012). The unified patent court: help or hindrance? (Published by authority house of commons No.HC1799). http:// www.parliament.uk /escom
  • Vozvaie, A.; Sarir, F.; Tabatabaei, M.; Javid, M. J. (2021). Legal, economic and social analysis, the condition of newness of inventions in line with the progress of science and social welfare of the country. Political Socialogy of Iran Journal, 5(7), 1-35. (In Persian). DOI: 10,30510/psi.2022,272610,1524
  • World intellectual property organization (Wipo).(2013).Summaries of conventions, treaties and agreements (Wipo publication No.442E/13). http://www.wipo.int
  • Zahedi, M.; Salamat, S.; Moradi, SH. (2021). A comparative study of stem cell patent conditions in America, Europe and Iran. Medical Law Journal, 15(56), 1-24. (In Persian).