Obviousness: Are We Moving Toward the Eye of the Beholder?
The Canadian Intellectual Property Review (CIPR) is a double-blind peer reviewed journal. It is sent to over 1,800 IPIC members at no cost and can be purchased by non-members for a fee. If you would like to browse the articles included in the CIPR, please consult our database below.
Any author, member or non-member can submit an article for consideration in the CIPR. The CIPR Editorial Board welcomes both short pieces (2,000 to 5,000 words) that may be included in the Notes section of the issue or longer, more in-depth articles. The maximum length of articles, including references, is 20,000 words. Articles may be submitted in French or English. Each article should be accompanied by a 150-word abstract.
All submissions undergo a double-blind review process: the reviewers are not given the authors' identities and the identities of the reviewers are shielded from the authors. Additionally, articles submitted must be original and must not have been previously published elsewhere.
If you would like to submit an article for an upcoming issue of the CIPR please contact admin@ipic.ca.
Canadian Intellectual Property Review
Share
Obviousness: Are We Moving Toward the Eye of the Beholder?
Issue: Volume 25 no 2
Author(s): Andrew M. Shaughnessy
Abstract:
This paper examines the changes to the test for obviousness in recent times, especially in the light of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Sanofi. A determination of obviousness, although stated to be an objective test conducted through the lens of the person of ordinary skill, is subjectively applied. Regardless of the framework used and no matter the semantics of the test employed, a fundamental question remains: when is an invention obvious? How does one determine where the shadows of obviousness end and the brilliance of invention begins? The tests for obviousness are easy to articulate, but they can be difficult to apply. By considering some recent applications of the test, this paper aims to shed some light on how obviousness is currently adjudged in Canada and whether we have moved closer to an “eye of the beholder” test.
