Existing Knowledge, Skilled Person and Inventive Step under Indian Patent Law and the Problem of Borrowings
Open accessAbstract
Assessment of inventive step is difficult, with several tests being laid down for the same in different jurisdictions. However, borrowing such tests, e.g. the Windsurfing test, the TSM test, or the concept ofPHOSITA from U.S. Law, into Indian jurisprudence must be done with caution. As we argue here, Indian Law has certain peculiarities- (i) it requires something more than a mere difference from prior art; it requires technical advance compared to existing knowledge, and (ii) the person judging such technical advance for existence of obviousness is not ordinary, not average nor super-skilled but a capable skilled person. Any interpretation or borrowing which loses sight of this statutory requirements can result in interpreting the skilled person as less capable than what the Indian Act/ legislature expected it to be. This can result in lowering the inventive step standard. This can have repercussions on the quality of granted patents, since it is the quality of innovation and not merely the quantum thereof which ought to matter.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
- Authors
- Tandon, V. V., & Siwal, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Delhi (IN)
- Venue
- Journal of Intellectual Property Rights
- Published
- 2025
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 0971-7544 (ISSN-L)
- 0975-1076
- OpenAlex
- W4408136763
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- Locations
- Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Intellectual Property Law
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Intellectual Property and Patents
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
- Keywords
- inventive step, skilled person, obviousness, Indian patent law, patentability standards, technological progress, prior art
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
