Germany: Protecting and enforcing data formats for the IoT

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Germany: Protecting and enforcing data formats for the IoT

In Germany, products that are directly obtained by a patent-protected process are entitled to patent protection according to Section 9, Sentence 2 (3) PatG, even if a claim directed to the product is lacking in the patent. To obtain extended protection, according to German practice, it is a necessary condition that the product as such would at least be accessible to patent protection.

In the reported decision BGH – X ZR 124/15 – Rezeptortyrosinkinase II, the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) resolved the question of allowing product protection for data directly obtained by a patent-protected process. Thus, the BGH had to rule on the issue of technical character and patentability of data, an important aspect of the discussion about patent eligibility of computer-implemented inventions in general.

The BGH stressed in its decision that a sequence of data can only be considered as a patent-infringing product which has been produced directly by a patent-protected process if the product has tangible and technical characteristics that have been induced by the process. In particular, the BGH considered that technical character is not to be awarded for data as a set of values providing information contents and in the case in question the court denied infringement. However, the BGH stated that a data format is technical and, therefore, eligible for patent protection. The decision follows the approach adopted in earlier court rulings affirming the technical character of data structures and file formats, as provided by BGH – X ZR 33/10 – MPEG-2-Videosignalcodierung. The decision is furthermore in line with case law of the European Patent Office according to which a computer-implemented data format is deemed to have technical character (T 1194/97).

A first conclusion to be drawn from the BGH – X ZR 124/15 decision is that it is worth claiming data structures or file formats when drafting a patent application, since data structures or file formats comprise technical character.

Second, when enforcing patent claims related to data structures or file formats, instead of enforcing claims directed to network entities or to systems, complicated issues such as joint, divided or indirect infringement might become obsolete. Although multiple actors or network elements may be involved in a distributed computing environment, data structures and file formats are basically used and processed by each actor or network element independently, an aspect which essentially simplifies resolving patent infringement disputes in complex network environments of connected and smart devices, such as the Internet of Things.

Simon Lud


Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbHElisenhof, Elisenstr 3D-80335, Munich, GermanyTel: +49 89 74 72 660 Fax: +49 89 77 64 24info@maiwald.euwww.maiwald.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The head of the soft IP team at engineering group Sandvik, winner of the in-house team of the year award, reveals why a flurry of M&A activity led to a busy 2024
Lawyers at Herbert Smith Freehills outline what rights owners should be doing ahead of sweeping changes to EU design law
Deals between five more law firms and President Trump and an antitrust lawsuit against Amgen were also among the top talking points this week
US counsel explain how they win new cleantech IP business and how they’re navigating the industry’s challenges
Leaders at the IP firms, which have joined forces with backing from a PE investor, share their vision of building the number one pan-European IP practice
Firms will steer clients towards other ways of getting quicker examinations, but fear the ramifications of the USPTO’s decision
Melissa Haapala added that returning to client advocacy and the chance to work on patent litigation were reasons for returning to private practice
Michelle Clark, who has a generalist litigation background, plans to focus on IP disputes at Alston & Bird
Philips and Vivo have entered into a licensing agreement, putting an end to a five-year-old telecom SEP dispute in India
Stefan Müller discusses managing deadlines, the importance of reflection, and why IP is more than just a 'nice to have'
Gift this article