Review of Blockchain patenting at the EPO - September 2019

Review of Blockchain patenting at the EPO September 2019 Numbers of patent applications related to “blockchain” developments have increased more or less exponentially in the last couple of years. This is roughly illustrated by the charts on the right.

The upper chart is based on the Espacenet Worldwide collection of published applications in English, which covers many countries. The chart shows numbers of patent families with applications published in English which mention the term “blockchain”1 anywhere in the full text and the numbers of patent families with applications published in English which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims. So far2, thousands of families of such “blockchain” applications have appeared in the Espacenet Worldwide collection. It seems reasonable to assume that there is a sizable reservoir of “blockchain” applications still to be published.

The lower chart is based on the EPO’s full-text search database. The chart shows European patent applications published in English which mention the term “blockchain”1 anywhere and the numbers of those applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims.

The two charts show similar paths of increase in the numbers concerned, though the numbers for European patent applications are on a smaller scale.

So far3 a total of just over 400 European patent applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 anywhere have been published and just over 190 European patent applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims have been published.

It seems reasonable to expect that further European “blockchain” applications will feed continued growth in published European patent applications even beyond the estimate made for the full year of 2019.

1

Or related terms “distributed ledger”, “shared ledger” Based on the Espacenet Worldwide collection of published applications in English accessed on 14.08.2019 3 Based on the EPO’s full-text search database accessed on 14.08.2019 2

1

* The numbers for “2019 so far” were taken from the Espacenet Worldwide collection of published applications in English on 14 and the EPO’s full-text search database on 14.08.2019. ** The numbers for “2019 Full Year” are simple estimates based on “2019 so far”.

Haseltine Lake Kempner | EPO newsletter September 2019

Tables 1 and 2 indicate applicants most active with regard to European patent applications published over the period 2014 to 2019 so far3 which reference blockchains. Table 1 lists applicants who accounted for five or more published EP applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims. Table 2 lists applicants who accounted for four or more published EP applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 anywhere in the full text.

Table 1

Table 2 Applicants Nchain Holdings Ltd

Published EP Applications 2014 – 2019 so far* 55

Accenture Global Services Ltd

27

Siemens AG

27

Nokia

21

Mastercard International Inc

11

Sony Corp

11

NEC

10

Applicants Accenture Global Services Ltd

Published EP Applications 2014 – 2019 so far* 18

Coinplug, Inc

8

Panasonic IP Corp. of America

8

Nokia Technologies Oy

15

Bundesdruckerei GmbH

6

Siemens AG

11

Ethicon LLC

6

Nchain Holdings Ltd

9

Fujitsu Limited

5

Sony Corporation

9

Alibaba Group Holding Ltd

4

Panasonic IP Corp. of America

8

British Telecomm

4

Coinplug, Inc

7

Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc.

4

NEC

6

4

Bundesdruckerei GmbH

5

Cloudminds (Shenzhen) Robotics Systems Co., Ltd. Deutsche Telekom AG NTT

4

Sensormatic Electronics LLC

4

* Based on the EPO’s full-text search database as accessed on 14.08.2019

4

Thomson Licensing 4 The numbers of published applications related to blockchain developments which have been provided VW 4 are based on simple word searches of the Espacenet Wipro Ltd 4 Worldwide collection of published applications in English and the EPO’s full-text search database, and so can only be illustrative. Unfortunately, blockchain-related developments do not fall clearly and cleanly into categories of the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC), which is likely the most sophisticated classification system publicly available. As illustrated below, a search of categories of the CPC relevant to the term “blockchain” (or possible alternative terms such as “distributed ledger” or “shared ledger”) turns up none of particular relevance (maximum two of possible five stars).

2

Haseltine Lake Kempner | EPO newsletter September 2019

Blockchains rest on sophisticated mathematics, computer and network software and hardware, and what might be called administrative procedures. This may well bring blockchainrelated developments into the realm of “computer implemented inventions” (CII) and so-called “mixed inventions” involving both “technical” and “non-technical” features.

Although the Guidelines for Examination at the EPO offer no blockchain-specific commentary and, so far as we are aware, there is as yet no EPO Board of Appeal case law specific to blockchain-related developments, how EPO Examiners deal with CII and “mixed inventions” is well understood. There is extensive commentary in the Guidelines for Examination at the EPO and a substantial body of Board of Appeal case law. A video presentation on the subject, given in December 2018 by a representative of the EPO at an EPO conference on blockchain patenting, can be found here: EPO “Patenting Blockchain”.

Some of the European patent applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims have received “European Search Opinions”. A preliminary review of the opinions suggests that objections of the kind attracted by “mixed inventions” are not uncommon, along with objections such as lack of clarity, lack of novelty and lack of inventive step.

A reservoir of experience in handling blockchain cases is building up, but so far few European patent applications which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims have reached conclusions. Of those applications, 7 have been withdrawn or deemed withdrawn. None has yet been refused for substantive reasons. 14 have been granted and 10 more have been allowed and should be granted in the near future.

The 14 European patents which mention the term “blockchain”1 in the claims are listed in the table below.

10 of those patents mention “blockchain” (or related terms “distributed ledger”, “shared ledger”) in claim 1.

Those claims are set out after the table.

Publn No

Patentee

Title

Appln No

EP 3226165 B1

Secure 3d Model Sharing Using Distributed Ledger

EP 17160522.3

EP 3285248 B1

Accenture Global Solutions Ltd Alcatel Lucent

EP 16306061.9

EP 3125489 B1

British Telecom

Blockchain-Based Security Threat Detection Method And System Mitigating Blockchain Attack

EP 3343425 B1

Bull Sas

System And Method For The Creation And Management Of Decentralized Authorizations For Connected Objects

EP 17210750.0

EP 3295349 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3295350 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3295362 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3257191 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3387786 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3387787 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3465578 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3387785 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3455999 B1

Nchain Holdings Ltd

EP 3229418 B1

Telefonica, S.A.

3

EP 15179440.1

A Method And System For Verifying Integrity Of A Digital Asset EP 17724453.0 Using A Distributed Hash Table And A Peer-To-Peer Distributed Ledger A Method And System For Verifying Ownership Of A Digital EP 17724645.1 Asset Using A Distributed Hash Table And A Peer-To-Peer Distributed Ledger A Method And System For Verifying Ownership Of A Digital EP 17724454.8 Asset Using A Distributed Hash Table And A Peer-To-Peer Distributed Ledger Registry And Automated Management Method For EP 17708587.5 Blockchain-Enforced Smart Contracts Computer-Implemented Systems And Methods To Enable Complex Functionality On A Blockchain While Preserving Security-Based Restrictions On Script Size And Opcode Limits Computer-Implemented Systems And Methods To Enable Complex Functionality On A Blockchain While Preserving Security-Based Restrictions On Script Size And Opcode Limits Methods And Systems To Establish Trusted Peer-To-Peer Communications Between Nodes In A Blockchain Network

EP 17840493.5

EP 17840540.3

EP 18734633.3

Computer-Implemented Systems And Methods To Enable Complex Functionality On A Blockchain While Preserving Security-Based Restrictions On Script Size And Opcode Limits Computer-Implemented System And Method

EP 17829702.4

A Method To Assure Correct Data Packet Traversal Through A Particular Path Of A Network

EP 16382153.1

Haseltine Lake Kempner | EPO newsletter September 2019

EP 18721130.5

EP 3295349 B1 1. A computer-implemented method of verifying integrity of a computer software for installation using a distributed hash table and a peer-to-peer distributed ledger, the method comprising: determining a metadata (M) associated with a transaction record stored on the peer-to-peer distributed ledger; determining an indication of an entry stored on the distributed hash table from the metadata (M); determining a third hash value (H3) based on the computer software; determining a fourth hash value (H4) from the entry on the distributed hash table; comparing the third hash value (H3) and the fourth hash value (H4); and verifying the integrity of the computer software based on the comparing of the third hash value (H3) and the fourth hash value (H4).

EP 3295350 B1 1. A computer-implemented method of verifying ownership of a computer software after installation and prior to execution of the computer software using a distributed hash table and a peer-to-peer distributed ledger, the method comprising: determining a second user public key (PU2) associated with a second user (U2) from a transaction Brecord stored on the peer-topeer distributed ledger; determining a second public key (P2) associated with the second user (U2) from an entry stored on the distributed hash table; comparing the second user public key (PU2) and the second public key (P2); and verifying the ownership of the computer software based on the comparing of the second user public key (PU2) and the second public key (P2).

EP 3295362 B1 1. A computer-implemented method of verifying ownership of a computer software for installation using a distributed hash table and a peer-to-peer distributed ledger, the method comprising: determining a second user public key (PU2) associated with a second user (U2) from a transaction record stored on the peer-topeer distributed ledger; determining a second public key (P2) associated with the second user (U2) from an entry stored on the distributed hash table; comparing the second user public key (PU2) and the second public key (P2); and verifying the ownership of the computer software based on the comparing of the second user public key (PU2) and the second public key (P2).

EP 3125489 B1 1. A computer implemented method for detecting malicious events occurring with respect to a blockchain data structure comprising: defining (402) a transaction creation profile according to which transactions can be generated and submitted to the blockchain; submitting (404) a transaction to the blockchain, the transaction causing the generation of a profiler data structure in the blockchain including executable code to generate profile transactions to be submitted to the blockchain according to the transaction creation profile; monitoring (406) the blockchain to identify profile transactions; and comparing (408) identified profile transactions with the transaction creation profile to detect a deviation from the transaction creation profile, such detection (410) corresponding to a malicious event occurring with respect to the blockchain.

EP 3285248 B1 1. A method of detecting a security threat within a network (10) of peer connected devices (11, 12) that share a ledger of transactions between them under the form of exchanged blockchain messages (13, 31), wherein at least one of said connected devices comprises a miner and wherein the connected device containing the miner is adapted to analyze and to update received blockchain messages in a blockchain database, said received blockchain message being received either from said miner or from the network, said method characterized in that it further comprises the steps of: - extracting, by a fork broadcast added to the miner, any forked chains (M5) from the blockchain messages (M1) before it is discarded and overwritten by the miner, - comparing received blocks with locally stored blocks, - if they do not match and the number of the received blocks is larger than the number of locally stored blocks, labeling the local chain as a fork - building, by a chain manager, an enhanced blockchain (M6) by adding all forked chains (51) to be included in messages sent to the blockchain database; and - inspecting, by anomaly detection system, the up to date enhanced blockchain (M7) and detect security threats; - detecting, by a pattern inspector (45), an anomaly (60) based on patterns in the added forked chains in order to detect suspicious patterns in the enhanced blockchain; identifying, by a threat detector (46) once a behavior has been detected by the pattern inspector, the security threat by reviewing all transactions of the ledger in the forked chain in which an anomaly has been detected, and in the standard blockchain leading up to the network attack entry point; and - including the enhanced blockchain in the exchanged blockchain messages.

EP 3343425 B1 A computing system (1) for creating authorizations, allocations and for managing said authorizations for connected objects (10) comprising: - a plurality of storage servers (20) comprising a blockchain (200) distributed in the form of storage nodes (201), said storage servers being able to record a new block (202) on the blockchain (200); - an access controlling module (30) being configured to create an access right to the blockchain (200), for a user (60) of the system, said access right being selected from a list comprising at least: an access right only comprising a read access, and an access right comprising a right to record new blocks (202) of the blockchain (200) on a storage node (201), the user (60)

4

Haseltine Lake Kempner | EPO newsletter September 2019

having such a right being a governing entity (70); - a write module (40) for creating authorization able to: receive smart contract execution data (240) issued by a governing entity (70), said smart contract execution data (240) comprising a unique identifier (241) of the smart contract, application conditions (242) of the smart contract and at least one conditional authorization (243) associated with the smart contract, and write said smart contract execution data (240) on a storage node (201) of said blockchain (200); and a connection module (50) for allocating authorization able to: receive connection data (250) between a connected object (10) and a third-party entity (80), said connection data (250) comprising at least one authorization request (253), identify on a storage node (201) of the blockchain (200), a conditional authorization (243) complementary to said authorization request (253), verify the application conditions (242) comprised in the smart contract execution data (240), and generate an authorization allocation instruction (220) acceding to the authorization request (253) only if all the application conditions (242) of said conditional authorization (243) are verified.

EP 3257191 B1 1. A computer-implemented method of controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract, the method comprising the steps: (a) storing a contract on or in a computer-based repository; (b) broadcasting a transaction to a blockchain, the transaction comprising: i) at least one unspent output (UTXO); and ii) metadata comprising an identifier indicative of the location where the contract is stored; (c) interpreting the contract as open or valid until the unspent output (UTXO) is spent on the blockchain; and (d) renewing or rolling the contract on by: generating a new key using data relating to a previous key associated with the contract; generating a script comprising the new key, the location of the contract and a hash of the contract; and paying an amount of currency to the script.

EP 3387785 B1 1. A method of using a plurality of blockchain transactions to execute a computer-implemented task, the method comprising the steps: using an unlocking script (ULS1) in a blockchain transaction (Tx2) to present at least one data item to a locking script (LS1) of another transaction (Tx1) so as to provide a result on a stack; generating a further unlocking script (ULS2) which comprises the result provided on the stack; presenting the further unlocking script (ULS2) to a further locking script (LS2) such that the result from the stack is provided as input to the further locking script.

EP 3387786 B1 1. A method of using a plurality of blockchain transactions to execute a computer-implemented task, comprising the steps: using an unlocking script (ULS1) associated with a first input (In1) in a blockchain transaction (Tx2) to present at least one data item to a first locking script (LS1) of another transaction (Tx1) so as to provide a result on a stack; generating a further unlocking script (ULS2) associated with a second input (In2) and comprising the result from the stack; wherein the second input (In2) is provided in a further blockchain transaction (Tx3); and presenting the further unlocking script (ULS2) to a further locking script (LS2) such that the result from the stack is provided as input to the further locking script.

EP 3387787 B1 1. A method of using a plurality of blockchain transactions to execute a computer-implemented task, comprising the steps: using an unlocking script (ULS1) associated with a first input (In1) in a blockchain transaction (Tx2) to present at least one data item to a locking script (LS1) of another transaction (Tx1) so as to provide a result on a stack; amending the blockchain transaction (Tx2) to include a second input (In2); generating a further unlocking script (ULS2) associated with the second input (In2), the further unlocking script (ULS2) comprising the result from the stack; and presenting the further unlocking script (ULS2) to a further locking script (LS2) such that the result from the stack is provided as input to the further locking script (LS2).

Contact us Frances Wilding Partner fwilding@hlk-ip.com David Lewin Partner dlewin@hlk-ip.com 5

Haseltine Lake Kempner | EPO newsletter September 2019