T 2314/16 (Distributing rewards by assigning users to partial advertisement display areas/RAKUTEN) of 07.09.2020
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2020:T231416.20200907
- Date of decision
- 7 September 2020
- Case number
- T 2314/16
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 11800813.5
- IPC class
- G06Q 30/02G06Q 30/00G06Q 50/00
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen and members (B)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- INFORMATION PROVIDING DEVICE, METHOD OF PROCESSING REWARD PAYMENT, REWARD PAYMENT PROCESSING PROGRAM, AND RECORDING MEDIUM WITH REWARD PAYMENT PROCESSING PROGRAM RECORDED THERON
- Applicant name
- Rakuten, Inc.
- Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.5.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 52(2)(c) (2007)European Patent Convention Art 56 (2007)
- Keywords
- Technical effect - reduced computational load (no - technical, but no embodiment to enable verification)
Inventive step - distributing rewards by assigning users to partial areas of an advertisement banner (yes
Inventive step - involves technical considerations of the web page system) - Catchword
- The specification of the business method ended with how to determine the reward distribution ratio. The features of dividing the advertisement display area into partial areas and allocating each partial area to a user such that when the partial area is clicked on the user gets a reward, were based on technical considerations of the web page system. It was not motivated by any business considerations.
...
In order to come up with this idea, one needs to understand how a web site is built, and in particular how an image map works. Thus, this feature cannot be part of the non-technical requirements. Instead it is part of the solution that has to be evaluated for obviousness. (See point 2.10 of the reasons)
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the examining division with the order to grant a patent on the basis of the following documents:
- Claims 1 to 4 filed during the oral proceedings before the Board;
- Description: pages 3 to 5 (clean version) filed during the oral proceedings before the Board,
pages 1, 2, 11 to 57 filed on entry into the regional phase before the EPO;
- Drawings: sheets 1 to 8 filed on entry into the regional phase before the EPO.