📌 To those reading this article: Please also take a look at IT Intellectual Property Portal, which provides one-stop support for patents, trademarks, and copyrights for IT companies.
``I want to develop a business prediction tool that utilizes AI, but will this be patentable?'' and ``What requirements are required to obtain a patent for business-related AI technology?'' These are questions that many companies have been asking in recent years.
As the use of AI in the business field accelerates, the need for patent protection is also increasing, but business-related inventions and AI-related inventions have traditionally been considered to have high hurdles to patenting. In particular, it has been difficult to meet descriptive requirements such as enablement requirements and support requirements, and there is a history of many applications being rejected.
In this article, we will analyze in detail Case 47 "Business Planning Support Device" included in the examination handbook of the Japan Patent Office, and explain the specific points for business-related AI inventions to be recognized as patents. This case is an example of a business planning support device that utilizes AI that was determined to meet the description requirements, and is extremely useful for companies and developers aiming to obtain patents in similar technical fields.
Case 47 shows the following claims.
[Claim 1]
Means for storing the inventory amount of a specific product;
Means for receiving advertising activity data and mention data on the web for the specific product;
using a predictive model learned by machine learning using the advertising activity data and mention data on the web regarding similar products sold in the past and the number of sales of the similar products as training data; A business plan support device comprising: means for simulating and outputting the future sales volume of the specific product predicted from advertising activity data and mention data; means for formulating a production plan including the future production volume of the specific product based on the stored inventory amount and the output sales number;
means for outputting the output sales volume and the formulated production plan.
In the detailed explanation of the invention, the background and problems of the present invention are that, with the spread of the Internet, advertising activities on the web have become an effective means of promoting product sales, but it is difficult to judge the effectiveness of actual advertising activities in real time, and it is shown that there is a risk of missing business opportunities due to lack of inventory due to trial and error.
In order to solve this problem, the present invention aims to provide a business planning support device that estimates the predicted future sales volume of a specific product from advertising activity data and reference data, and presents a production plan including future production volume based on the predicted inventory volume and sales volume.
The following data and functions are described as components of the present invention:
It should be noted that for claim 1 of Case 47, no reason for refusal was notified for violation of description requirements (violation of enablement requirements/violation of support requirements). In other words, it is shown as an example that satisfies the stated conditions.
Let's analyze in detail the reason why Case 47 was determined to meet the description requirements.
The enablement requirement (Article 36, Paragraph 4, Item 1 of the Patent Act) asks whether the description is clear and sufficient to the extent that a person skilled in the art can carry out the invention. Case 47 emphasizes the following points:
Clear identification of input and output data:
Existence of correlation between data:
Clear description of machine learning technology:
The review handbook's explanation states:
It is well known at the time of filing that it is possible to generate a predictive model that estimates the output corresponding to the input by performing machine learning using a general machine learning algorithm using input data and output data that have a correlation, etc. as training data.
This indicates that since the machine learning technology itself is well known, a detailed explanation is not necessary, and that it can be implemented by a person skilled in the art if a correlation can be inferred between input and output data.
The support requirement (Article 36, Paragraph 6, Item 1 of the Patent Act) asks whether the claimed invention is stated in the detailed description of the invention. In Case 47, it is determined that the invention of claim 1 satisfies the support requirements from the following points:
Specific description of problem-solving methods:
Specificity of Examples:
Reasonable predictability of effect:
From the analysis of case 47, let's summarize the important points in obtaining patents for business-related AI inventions.
The most important thing in business-related AI inventions is to clarify the correlation between input data and output data. In Case 47, it is accepted as technical knowledge that there is a correlation between advertising activity data/mention data and sales numbers.
However, if it is not accepted as common technical knowledge, the following actions are required:
Specific explanation of correlation:
Rationale for correlation:
If the AI model itself is not the essence of the invention, a detailed explanation of it is not necessarily necessary. In Case 47, it is sufficient to state "well-known machine learning algorithms such as neural networks."
However, please note the following:
When the AI model is the essence of the invention:
When using unknown technology:
For business-related inventions, it is important to demonstrate not only business effects but also technical effects. Case 47 has both the following effects:
Business impact:
Technical effect:
In this way, by clarifying the structure in which a business problem is solved by technical means, patentability increases.
While Case 47 was determined to satisfy the description requirements, there are also cases in which similar AI-related inventions violate the description requirements. Let's take a look at the differences by comparing it with other cases in the Examination Handbook.
Case 46 "Sugar content estimation system" is a system that uses machine learning to predict the relationship between a person's face image and the sugar content of vegetables grown by that person, but it is considered to be in violation of the enablement requirements.
Reasons why case 46 was rejected:
Differences from case 47:
Claim 1 of Case 49, "Weight Estimation System," is a system that estimates a person's weight from their height and features representing the shape of their face, but it is considered to be in violation of support requirements.
Reasons why case 49 was rejected:
Differences from case 47:
Based on the analysis of case 47, we will summarize practical points for satisfying the description requirements in patent applications for business-related AI inventions.
Clarify the technical aspects of the problem:
Specifically identify input/output data:
Explain correlations between data:
Clarify how to use AI technology:
Specific description of effect:
Clearly describe technical components:
Appropriately limit input/output data:
Specifically describe the functions of the AI model:
Clarify the relationship between business processes and technical processing:
Let's also keep in mind the points to be taken in case you receive a reason for refusal:
Rejection reasons for correlation:
Reason for refusal regarding enablement requirements:
Rejection reasons for support requirements:
From the analysis of Case 47 "Business Planning Support Device", important points in obtaining patents for business-related AI inventions can be summarized as follows:
Clarification of technical issues and solutions:
Supporting data correlation:
Selection and description of appropriate AI technology:
Specific description of effect:
Business-related AI inventions are unlikely to be granted patentability if they are simply the systemization of business methods or the simple application of AI, but by clearly demonstrating the solution to the technical problem and appropriately supporting the correlation between input and output data, the possibility of obtaining a patent increases, as in Case 47.
As AI technology advances, its applications in the business field are expanding day by day. If your company has a unique business model or data analysis method, it may be possible to protect it as intellectual property. At our firm, we utilize our extensive experience and expertise in obtaining patents for business-related AI inventions to propose the optimal patent acquisition strategy. Please feel free to contact us.
🏢 Complete intellectual property strategy support for IT companies
Patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets --- One-stop support for the intellectual property necessary for IT business.
From startups to listed companies, we will propose the optimal intellectual property strategy tailored to your business phase.
View IT intellectual property portal (general information) →
AUTHOR
Takefumi SUGIURA (杉浦 健文)
EVORIX Intellectual Property Law Firm Managing Patent Attorney
Supports clients across IT, manufacturing, startups, fashion, and medical industries, covering patent, trademark, design, and copyright filings through trials and infringement litigation. Specialized in IP strategy for AI, IoT, Web3, and FinTech. Member of the Japan Patent Attorneys Association (JPAA), Asian Patent Attorneys Association (APAA), and Japan Trademark Association (JTA).