[Unfair Competition Prevention Act, Article 2(7)]
Osaka District Court, Case No. 2025 (Wa) 7894 (Presiding Judge Matsukawa) 1. Pachinko machine payout data (machine data) does not constitute "data for limited provision."
[Copyrighted works] Osaka District Court, Case No. 2023 (Wa) 9267
"Yamashiron" (Presiding Judge Matsukawa) *Regarding the requirement of "specific reference" under Article 61(2) of the Copyright Act, the court held that a comprehensive statement or agreement is insufficient and that an express agreement specifically identifying the rights under Articles 27 and 28 of the Copyright Act as rights to be transferred is necessary.
Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 70478
[Monitoring system] (Presiding Judge Takahashi) Inventive step denied, with "GPS BoT," the plaintiff's own publicly worked invention, as the primary reference. (Translation of the quoted judgment)
The Supreme Court's Product-by-Process Judgments
An English translation of Hideki Takaishi's 2015 commentary on the Supreme Court's PBP judgments and consistent claim construction.
Legal Update (Items Posted in January 2026)
A review of 34 articles published in January 2026 by attorney Hideki Takaishi, covering divisional applications, invalidity arguments, claim interpretation, international jurisdiction, standard-essential patents and employee inventions.
Legal Update (Items Posted in February 2026)
A review of 34 articles published in February 2026 by attorney Hideki Takaishi, covering claim interpretation, inventive step, inventorship, employee inventions, pharmaceutical patents, standard-essential patents and copyright.
A Recent Court Decision on the Copyrightability of Applied Art
A 2015 case note on the copyrightability of applied art, discussing the decision in Heisei 26 (Ne) No. 10063 and its relationship to approaches in foreign jurisdictions.
I Gave a Lecture on Inventive Step and Disclosure Requirements for Numerically Limited (Parameter) Inventions (March 12, 2015)
Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む I have uploaded the materials to another page, so please refer to them. A “qualitatively different effect” is not the “effect” itself..., English translation of the Japanese article.
The “Trial and Appeal Practitioners Study Group Report 2014” Has Been Published
The report compiles discussions among administrative patent judges, corporate practitioners, patent attorneys and attorneys at law. Hideki Takaishi participated in the mechanical field.
A Draft Revision of the Examination Guidelines on Inventive Step Has Been Published
A 2015 update introducing a draft revision of the examination guidelines on inventive step and the proceedings of the relevant Japan Patent Office working group.
