The board clarified the non-public status of e-mail correspondence. The opponent asserted an e-mail from a third party to the opponent as part of the state of the art. It was not in dispute that both the sender and the recipient were bound to secrecy. However, it was asserted that the e-mail should already be regarded publicly available because it was routed via third party servers, possibly through jurisdictions where lawful interception was possible. The board ruled that the sole fact that the e-mail was transmitted via the Internet before the filing date did not render its content available to the public within the meaning of Article 54(2) EPC 1973.
Click here for the full text of this case.
A summary of this case will be posted on http://www.KluwerIPCases.com
_____________________________
To make sure you do not miss out on regular updates from the Kluwer Patent Blog, please subscribe here.
Kluwer IP Law
The 2022 Future Ready Lawyer survey showed that 79% of lawyers think that the importance of legal technology will increase for next year. With Kluwer IP Law you can navigate the increasingly global practice of IP law with specialized, local and cross-border information and tools from every preferred location. Are you, as an IP professional, ready for the future?
Learn how Kluwer IP Law can support you.
