Show Summary Details
Intellectual Property Law

Intellectual Property Law (5th edn)

Lionel Bently, Brad Sherman, Dev Gangjee, and Phillip Johnson
Page of

Printed from Oxford Law Trove. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 30 September 2022

p. 55118. Noveltylocked

p. 55118. Noveltylocked

  • L. Bently, L. BentlyHerchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property, University of Cambridge
  • B. Sherman, B. ShermanProfessor of Law, University of Queensland
  • D. GangjeeD. GangjeeAssociate Professor of Intellectual Property Law, University of Oxford
  •  and P. JohnsonP. JohnsonProfessor of Commercial Law, Cardiff University

Abstract

This chapter considers novelty as a prerequisite for an invention to be patentable under both the Patents Act 1977 and the European Patents Convention. More specifically, it tackles three questions to help decide whether an invention is novel: what the invention is; what information is disclosed by the prior art; and whether the invention is novel (part of the state of the art). It also looks at the so-called ‘right to work’ argument, whereby novelty helps to ensure that patents are not used to prevent people from doing what they had already done before the patent was granted, and its modification as a result of changes in the way in which novelty is determined. The chapter concludes by discussing three specific types of inventions and the problems that have arisen when evaluating their novelty: inventions relating to medical uses, non-medical uses, and so-called selection inventions.

You do not currently have access to this chapter

Sign in

Please sign in to access the full content.

Subscribe

Access to the full content requires a subscription