About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Member states Discuss Ways to Further Harmonize Patent Law

Geneva, May 18, 2004
Press Updates UPD/2004/225

Member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) met in Geneva from May 10 to 14, 2004, to discuss future directions for international harmonization of substantive patent law and to review provisions of a draft Substantive Patent Law Treaty (SPLT). The Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) was attended by representatives from 71 member states, 7 intergovernmental organizations and 27 non-governmental organizations.

The draft SPLT covers a range of basic legal principles that govern the grant and validity of patents in different countries, such as the criteria for assessing whether an invention is novel and involves an inventive step, whether it is industrially applicable (or has utility) and whether it is sufficiently described in the patent application concerned, and how patent claims should be drafted and interpreted. It aims to simplify, streamline and achieve greater convergence among national and regional patent laws and practices.

The SCP considered whether discussions should at this stage be limited to a number of provisions dealing with the definition of prior art, grace period, novelty and inventive step (non-obviousness) or whether talks should cover the current draft SPLT as a whole and consider issues such as disclosure of the origin of genetic resources and traditional knowledge, public health and exceptions to patentability criteria. The SCP did not reach agreement as to the scope of its future work but agreed to continue discussion of the existing draft SPLT text during the present session.

A number of draft provisions, such as the one relating to the fact that information made available to the public in any form shall form part of the prior art, which is central to the patent examination process, were accepted on the understanding that any delegation could re-open discussion of them in the future. Discussions brought about greater mutual understanding and movement towards agreement on a number of issues, such as the introduction of a grace period, the prior art effect of international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) that are filed before but published after the application under consideration, and the definition of novelty. On a number of other issues, however, there are still important differences of approach among delegations and further reflection is required.

For further information, please contact the Media Relations and Public Affairs Section at WIPO:

  • Tel: (+41 22) - 338 81 61 or 338 95 47
  • Fax: (+41 22) - 338 88 10
  • Email: publicinf@wipo.int.