【 Preface to Words 】
Graphical user interface (GUI) is the way for users to interact with computers, and it is also the front-end representation of the underlying program code. Because of the particularity of invention patent applications involving computer programs, how to grasp the creative judgment of invention patents based on GUI is also controversial. In this paper, through a case of invalidation request, the creative judgment of invention patent based on graphical user interface is analyzed in detail.
[Concept elaboration]
Chapter 9 of the Examination Guide gives special provisions on the writing of the description and claims of an application for a patent for invention involving a computer program. It is necessary to reflect the technical scheme of the invention as a whole and record the necessary technical features for solving technical problems, instead of simply describing the functions that the computer program has and the effects that the functions can achieve. The method claims should describe in detail the functions that the computer program performs and how to complete them according to the steps of the method flow. The provisions on creative review in Chapter 9 of the Examination Guide, when examining an application for a patent for invention with algorithmic features or business rules and methods, should consider the algorithmic features or business rules and methods that are functionally mutually supportive and interactive with the technical features as a whole. This provision does not conflict with the provisions on creativity in Chapter 4 of Part II of the Examination Guide, and the creative judgment of an application for a patent for invention based on graphical user interface has the same creative judgment as that of applications for a patent for invention in other fields. How to better deal with the relationship between specific writing methods and creative judgment, especially how to accurately identify technical effects under this writing method needs more discussion.
Taking the case under review as an example, it relates to the technical content that users can directly perform simple and intuitive gesture operations on the display screen, which is widely used in the man-machine interaction of the graphical user interface of mobile intelligent terminals. The subject of claim 1 is a shooting method, and part of the features defined by this shooting are the functions executed by computer programs and how to complete these functions, and part of the features are the dynamic changes of the graphical user interface. The effects of graphical user interface recorded in the manual are mostly subjective feelings established in the process of using products, and these characteristics are related to their technical fields. However, whether the characteristics describing the effects of people’s cognitive impressions, psychological reactions and behaviors are obvious or can produce beneficial technical effects compared with the existing technologies, the author believes that in addition to considering the technical scheme recorded in the invention patent application for graphical user interface, we should also treat the invention of graphical user interface as a whole, and consider the technical fields to which the invention belongs, the technical problems solved and the production.
[Case Deduction]
First, determine the technical effect and technical problems in the technical field.
The patent involved in the examination decision is the shooting method limited by the operation steps of the graphical user interface, and the comparison file used in the examination decision is the software version before this patent, both of which are used for shooting the mobile terminal by man-machine interaction of the graphical user interface. The difference between them is that the patent has added the feature that the button shape changes in the same direction as the carrier moves on the screen to remind the user of the current operation information. Just looking at the above differences, it’s just a dynamic graphical user interface operation change, whose function is to prompt the user’s current operation and enhance the user experience. The effect brought by this operation change in any graphical user interface is consistent, and it is impossible to know its beneficial effect, but it is completely different when it is placed in the field where the invention patent is located. The change caused by this operation is the change of whether the shooting information prompt is given during the shooting process, which is the effect produced in practical application. Moreover, there is a big difference in the experience between the photographer with information prompt and the photographer without information prompt, so it is necessary to combine the technical field to determine the technical effect.
Also considering the technical field, it will be clear in creative judgment that the technical problem to be solved is closely related to online video shooting. This button posture changes with the movement of the button, which can give the photographer accurate information. By giving the information, the photographer can know what he is doing and have an intuitive feeling of what he is doing, that is to say, he knows that the technical task of improving the nearest existing technology in order to obtain better shooting effect is to give corresponding shooting tips. Without the technical field, "the position and posture of the button changes with the movement of the carrier" is a change in the graphical user interface, just like the simple movement of the mouse on the computer display interface, which is not related to the actual operation and will not produce the actual technical effect, and the technicians in this field are not clear about the problem to be solved by this feature. Therefore, in creative judgment, it is necessary to consider the technical effect of technical features in the technical field of graphical user interface and re-determine the technical problems that need to be solved according to the technical field.
Second, objectively judge the technical effect and technical problems
First of all, objectively understand the technical effect and technical problems of the patent recording scheme. Technical effect is an important factor to judge creativity, and beneficial technical effect is an important basis to determine whether an invention has "significant progress". The description should clearly and objectively state the beneficial effects of the invention or utility model compared with the existing technology. The patent involved in this decision records that the invention in the prior art has the beneficial technical effects of "supporting the interactive action of shooting button movement with finger movement, meeting the needs of users to continue shooting with multi-angle and rotating mobile phones, and improving the user experience". In the author’s opinion, after reading this patent, we can know that the specific technical feature of the shooting method "the button moves with the finger during shooting" brings the technical effect of "multi-angle, rotating the mobile phone can continue shooting", and based on this technical effect, the problem of "how to achieve multi-angle shooting" is determined to be solved, but "improving the user experience" cannot solve the above problem; At the same time, the technical effect is brought by the technical features of the invention directly acting on the product or inevitably produced in the product, which is the product itself and the external presentation of the technical scheme, while "improving the user experience" is the intuitive feeling of the user in the process of using the product, which is also interpreted in ISO9241-210 standard as including the user’s feelings, beliefs, preferences, cognitive impressions, physiological and psychological reactions, behaviors and achievements in using the product. These feelings are formed by people’s processing, and they may vary from person to person. Similarly, people’s feelings are not the attributes of products, so it is not appropriate to divide them into technical features with technical effects.
Secondly, objectively understand the technical effects of patents compared with existing technologies. In the decision, the reference document discloses the above-mentioned feature "supporting the interactive action of shooting button movement with finger movement", which also discloses the claimed technical effect, and the Review Guide says that "as a principle, any technical effect of the invention can be used as the basis for re-determining technical problems". Therefore, in the case that the difference between the technical scheme protected by this patent claim and the reference document has changed (the specific difference feature is as above), the technical scheme of this patent should be re-recognized when judging creativity.
In the above distinguishing features, "used for prompting the user’s current operation information" is the function or result of "the shape of the button changes in the same direction with the movement of the carrier", which is not the operation mode or step of shooting. Although it can satisfy the user’s easier interaction with the product, it is beneficial to complete the ideal shooting and even improve the user experience. In the case that the technical scheme does not record that "Prompting the user’s current operation information" is associated with the product it works on and can realize a specific function, it should not continue to be considered that this feature has other technical effects, unless the technical scheme also records that the next step or operation should be continued according to "Prompting the user’s current operation information". Therefore, the technical effect of the above distinguishing features is that the button shape changes in the same direction with the movement of the carrier when the carrier pressing the button moves on the screen, and the user is informed of the current operation action, so that the user can clearly know the current operation action, that is, the user is prompted of the current operation information, the controllability of the product is improved, and of course, the user experience is improved.
Based on this technical effect, the technical problem is "how to improve the controllability of products". From the overall technical scheme, this technical effect inevitably produced by technical characteristics is beneficial technical effect, so the invention has made remarkable progress.
Third, commercial success plays an auxiliary role in creative judgment.
The Review Guide gives other factors that need to be considered when judging an invention, and emphasizes that when the application is "the invention is successful in business", it should not be easily concluded that the invention is not creative. Some people also think that "patent is the product of the market, and its destination is the market after all". The commercial success of software products is the result of users’ comparison and selection of specific software and other similar software in the market in a free market. Most countries, such as the United States and Japan, basically adopt the standard of "non-obviousness" in creative judgment, and believe that whether an invention patent reflects technological progress can be tested by market rules without making special provisions in the patent law. From this point of view, if the free use of similar software includes the invention patents of computer graphical user interface, which invention patent obtains beneficial technical effects, the market choice is more authentic.
It is true that there is no quantitative proof standard for commercial success, but the large increase in the number of users of a software and the frequent imitation by latecomers can reflect the beneficial effects of the invention in the software, and also show that the invention is not obvious. Although commercial success was not introduced in the examination decision, objectively, the shooting method of the patent involved was used in the version of "vibrato short video" after the patent application date, and its download volume was much larger than that before the application date. Excluding the increase in software usage caused by the improvement of sales technology, advertising or the habitual effect of the public’s continuous use of software, the positive and efficient experience brought by the software improvement to the users can not be underestimated, which is why the software users can be more welcome to the new version.
During the substantive examination, the application for a patent for invention of graphical user interface may not be popularized on a large scale or widely recognized in the industry, that is, it has not achieved commercial success, so it is not obvious that the beneficial effects of the invention can not be considered from the perspective of commercial success in the substantive examination. However, if the patent is found to be commercially successful in the post-confirmation procedure, it should be considered and the conclusion that the invention is not creative should not be easily made, which leads to different factors to be considered in the creative judgment of invention patent authorization and confirmation. Theoretically, the conclusion whether the invention is creative should be unique, so the commercial success directly caused by technical characteristics should not conflict with the beneficial effects obtained by other judgment methods, so as to avoid the situation that different creative judgment methods lead to different conclusions. (Review and Invalid Trial Department Zhou Leiming lixi)