Insurance patent

Last updated

Under some patent laws, patents may be obtained for insurance-related inventions . Historically, patents could only cover the technological aspects of a new insurance invention. [1] This is still the case in most countries. In the United States, however, recent court decisions have encouraged more inventors to file patent applications on methods of doing business. These patents may be used to get more comprehensive coverage of improvements in basic insurance processes, such as the methods of calculating premiums, reserves, underwriting, etc. This is causing controversy in the insurance industry as some see it as a positive development and others see it as a negative development.

Contents

History

Early example of an insurance patent USpatent467872.JPG
Early example of an insurance patent

An early example of an insurance patent is U.S. Patent 467,872 Means for Securing Travelers Against Loss by Accident. This patent was issued in 1892. It discloses a means for selling travelers' insurance by combining coupons with a newspaper.

A more recent example of an insurance patent is EPapplication 0700009  , granted as EP 0700009B   "Individual evaluation system for motorcar risk". This patent issued by the European Patent Office in 1996 to Salvador Minguijon Perez. It discloses a means for auto insurance risk selection whereby a driver’s mileage and driving behavior are monitored and insurance premiums are charged accordingly. The United Kingdom part of this European patent has been sold to Norwich Union insurance company.

Growth

Historically, only about one or two patents per year issued in the US on inventions specifically related to insurance policies. [2]

This changed dramatically, however, with the 1998 State Street Bank Decision. The State Street Bank Decision was a ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that confirmed that there was no “business method exception” under United States patent law. The number of patent applications filed per year after this decision was handed down jumped to about 150. The number of patents issuing per year jumped to about 30. [3]

This changed dramatically again in 2014 after the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, holding that an abstract idea does not become patentable just because it is implemented on a computer. After Alice, the allowance rate for U.S. patent applications in the financial arts, including insurance, plummeted. [4]

Litigation

In September 2006, Lincoln National Corporation filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Transamerica Life Insurance Company and other entities for allegedly infringing U.S. Patent 7,089,201 , “Method and apparatus for providing retirement income benefits”. [5] This patent covers methods for administering variable annuities. The jury found the patent valid and infringed. The court ordered Transamerica to pay Lincoln $13 million in damages. [6] At a rate of 11 basis points of assets under management, this was considered a reasonable royalty. [7] In June 2010, however, the verdict against Transamerica was overturned on appeal [8]

In June 2010, Progressive Auto Insurance filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Liberty Mutual over one of Progressive’s Pay As You Drive auto insurance patents. [9]

Controversy

Some in the insurance industry see the growth in insurance patents as a positive development. They cite that by being able to protect inventions, insurance companies will be more inclined to invest in new product development. [10]

Some are concerned that the growth in patent claims will be negative. They are concerned that invalid patents will issue and that this will lead to patent trolls inhibiting new product introductions by demanding excessive license fees for these questionable patents. [11]

Public review

First Insurance Patent Application posted for public review US29055227A1 Bakos.png
First Insurance Patent Application posted for public review

Inventors can now have their insurance U.S. patent applications reviewed by the public in the Peer to Patent program. [12] The first insurance patent application to be posted was US2009005522 “Risk assessment company”. It was posted on March 6, 2009. This patent application describes a method for increasing the ease of changing insurance companies to get better rates. [13]

Notable patents

See also

Related Research Articles

Insurance Equitable transfer of the risk of a loss, from one entity to another in exchange for payment

Insurance is a means of protection from financial loss. It is a form of risk management, primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent or uncertain loss.

A software patent is a patent on a piece of software, such as a computer program, libraries, user interface, or algorithm.

Prior art is a concept in patent law used to determine the patentability of an invention, in particular whether an invention meets the novelty and the inventive step or non-obviousness criteria for patentability. In most systems of patent law, prior art is generally defined as anything that is made available, or disclosed, to the public that might be relevant to a patent's claim before the effective filing date of a patent application for an invention. However, notable differences exist in how prior art is specifically defined under different national, regional, and international patent systems.

Patent infringement is the commission of a prohibited act with respect to a patented invention without permission from the patent holder. Permission may typically be granted in the form of a license. The definition of patent infringement may vary by jurisdiction, but it typically includes using or selling the patented invention. In many countries, a use is required to be commercial to constitute patent infringement.

The software patent debate is the argument about the extent to which, as a matter of public policy, it should be possible to patent software and computer-implemented inventions. Policy debate on software patents has been active for years. The opponents to software patents have gained more visibility with fewer resources through the years than their pro-patent opponents. Arguments and critiques have been focused mostly on the economic consequences of software patents.

Patent pending As yet ungranted patent application

"Patent pending" or "patent applied for" are legal designations or expressions that can be used in relation to a product or process once a patent application for the product or process has been filed, but prior to the patent being issued or the application abandoned. The marking serves to notify the public, business, or potential infringers who would copy the invention that they may be liable for damages, seizure, and injunction once a patent is issued.

Lincoln National Corporation American insurance and investment management company

Lincoln National Corporation is a Fortune 250 American holding company, which operates multiple insurance and investment management businesses through subsidiary companies. Lincoln Financial Group is the marketing name for LNC and its subsidiary companies.

Business method patents are a class of patents which disclose and claim new methods of doing business. This includes new types of e-commerce, insurance, banking and tax compliance etc. Business method patents are a relatively new species of patent and there have been several reviews investigating the appropriateness of patenting business methods. Nonetheless, they have become important assets for both independent inventors and major corporations.

Patent prosecution describes the interaction between applicants and their representatives, and a patent office with regard to a patent, or an application for a patent. Broadly, patent prosecution can be split into pre-grant prosecution, which involves arguing before, and sometimes negotiation with, a patent office for the grant of a patent, and post-grant prosecution, which involves issues such as post-grant amendment and opposition.

Design patent US Patent Law

In the United States, a design patent is a form of legal protection granted to the ornamental design of a functional item. Design patents are a type of industrial design right. Ornamental designs of jewelry, furniture, beverage containers and computer icons are examples of objects that are covered by design patents.

In international law and business, patent trolling or patent hoarding is a categorical or pejorative term applied to a person or company that attempts to enforce patent rights against accused infringers far beyond the patent's actual value or contribution to the prior art, often through hardball legal tactics. Patent trolls often do not manufacture products or supply services based upon the patents in question. However, some entities which do not practice their asserted patent may not be considered "patent trolls" when they license their patented technologies on reasonable terms in advance.

Usage-based insurance (UBI), also known as pay as you drive (PAYD), pay how you drive (PHYD) and mile-based auto insurance, is a type of vehicle insurance whereby the costs are dependent upon type of vehicle used, measured against time, distance, behavior and place.

Japanese patent law is based on the first-to-file principle and is mainly given force by the Patent Act of Japan. Article 2 defines an invention as "the highly advanced creation of technical ideas utilizing the law of nature".

This is a list of legal terms relating to patents. A patent is not a right to practice or use the invention, but a territorial right to exclude others from commercially exploiting the invention, granted to an inventor or his successor in rights in exchange to a public disclosure of the invention.

The involvement of the public in patent examination is used in some forms to help identifying relevant prior art and, more generally, to help assessing whether patent applications and inventions meet the requirements of patent law, such as novelty, inventive step or non-obviousness, and sufficiency of disclosure.

<i>Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd</i>

Aerotel v Telco and Macrossan's Application is a judgment by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The judgment was passed down on 27 October 2006 and relates to two different appeals from decisions of the High Court. The first case involved GB 2171877 granted to Aerotel Ltd and their infringement action against Telco Holdings Ltd and others. The second case concerned GB application 2388937 filed by Neal Macrossan but refused by the UK Patent Office.

A tax patent is a patent that discloses and claims a system or method for reducing or deferring taxes. Tax patents have been granted predominantly in the United States but can be granted in other countries as well. They are considered to be a form of business method patent. They are also called "tax planning patents", "tax strategy patents", and "tax shelter patents". In September 2011, President Barack Obama signed legislation passed by the U.S. Congress that effectively prohibits the granting of tax patents in general.

Leahy–Smith America Invents Act

The Leahy–Smith America Invents Act (AIA) is a United States federal statute that was passed by Congress and was signed into law by President Barack Obama on September 16, 2011. The law represents the most significant legislative change to the U.S. patent system since the Patent Act of 1952 and closely resembles previously proposed legislation in the Senate in its previous session.

Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), was a 2014 United States Supreme Court decision about patent eligibility. The issue in the case was whether certain patent claims for a computer-implemented, electronic escrow service covered abstract ideas, which would make the claims ineligible for patent protection. The patents were held to be invalid because the claims were drawn to an abstract idea, and implementing those claims on a computer was not enough to transform that abstract idea into patentable subject matter.

Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., 788 F.3d 1371, was a controversial decision of the Federal Circuit in which the court applied the Mayo v. Prometheus test to invalidate as patent-ineligible a patent said to "solve ... a very practical problem accessing fetal DNA without creating a major health risk for the unborn child." In December 2015, the Federal Circuit denied a motion for en banc rehearing, with several members of the court filing opinions urging Supreme Court review. On June 27, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States denied Sequenom's petition for a writ of certiorari.

References

  1. Chartrand, Sabra "Protecting Ideas in the Insurance Business" New York Times June 30, 2003
  2. Google patent search on “insurance policy”
  3. Insurance IP Bulletin, February 2007, “Statistics”
  4. Bilski Blog: Surviving Alice in the Finance Arts
  5. David G. Luettgen, “Foley Sponsors Conference on Business Method Patents for the Financial Services Industry”, Sept. 12, 2006 Archived 2007-05-06 at the Wayback Machine
  6. "Karen, Mracek, "Patent case ruling to cost Transamerica $13 million", Des Moines Register, Feb 19, 2009". Archived from the original on February 21, 2009. Retrieved February 21, 2009.
  7. Nowotarski, Mark, “What is a reasonable royalty?” Insurance IP Bulletin, February 15, 2009
  8. Business Method Patents: Insurance Companies Fighting over Patented Annuity Plans Patently O blog, June 23, 2010
  9. Shaheen Samavati “Progressive files suit against Liberty Mutual”, The Plain Dealer, June 21, 2010
  10. Bowers, Barbara “Patents Pending, Insurers no longer enjoy open season on the product innovations of competitors.” Best’s Review June 2004
  11. Rutkowski, Therese, “Carriers Unaware of IP Ownership Threats and Opportunities”, Insurance Networking News, August 2005
  12. Mark Nowotarski "Patent Q/A: Peer to Patent", Insurance IP Bulletin, August 15, 2008
  13. Bakos, Nowotarski, “An Experiment in Better Patent Examination”, Insurance IP Bulletin, December 15, 2008