Blockchain Patent Disputes India.
1. Why There Are Very Few Direct “Blockchain Patent” Cases in India
Blockchain is treated under Indian law as:
Computer-related invention (CRI)
Governed primarily by Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970
Section 3(k): “A mathematical or business method or a computer programme per se or algorithms are not patentable.”
Most blockchain patent disputes in India therefore arise in:
Patent Office opposition proceedings
Patent rejection appeals
Indirect infringement disputes involving fintech, cryptography, or software systems
Hence, courts rely heavily on earlier software patent jurisprudence.
2. Key Legal Issues in Blockchain Patent Disputes
Indian blockchain patent disputes usually revolve around:
Whether the invention is “computer program per se”
Whether blockchain implementation shows technical effect / technical contribution
Whether cryptographic consensus mechanisms are algorithms or technical processes
Whether smart contracts are business methods in disguise
Infringement in permissioned blockchain systems (banks, supply chain, telecom)
3. Important Indian Case Laws Relevant to Blockchain Patent Disputes
Case 1: Ferid Allani v. Union of India (Delhi High Court, 2019)
Relevance to Blockchain
This is the most important case for blockchain patents in India.
Facts
Patent application for a method and device for accessing information using a web-based system
Rejected by Patent Office under Section 3(k)
Court’s Ruling
The Delhi High Court held:
If a computer-based invention demonstrates a technical effect or technical contribution, it cannot be rejected outright
Modern technologies like:
Artificial Intelligence
Blockchain
Distributed ledgers
Cryptography
must be examined pragmatically
Key Observation
“The bar on patenting computer programs must be interpreted in today’s digital economy.”
Impact on Blockchain Disputes
Blockchain patents cannot be rejected merely because they use software
Consensus mechanisms, security layers, and distributed validation may qualify as technical effects
This case is frequently cited in blockchain patent oppositions
Case 2: Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Intex Technologies (Delhi High Court, 2015)
Relevance to Blockchain
Though a telecom case, it established software + hardware patent infringement principles applicable to blockchain nodes and networks.
Issues
Whether implementation using software avoids patent infringement
Whether system-level patents can be infringed by distributed networks
Court’s Findings
Merely implementing a patented process through software does not avoid infringement
Functional use of a patented system is sufficient
Blockchain Application
In blockchain disputes:
Running validator nodes
Using patented consensus or encryption methods
can amount to infringement even if implemented via software
Case 3: Accenture Global Services GmbH v. Assistant Controller of Patents (Delhi High Court, 2022)
Facts
Patent application involving blockchain-based transaction validation
Rejected as business method + software per se
Court’s Reasoning
Rejection without examining technical contribution is improper
Patent Office must analyze:
System architecture
Data flow
Security improvement
Performance enhancement
Significance
This case is often relied upon in blockchain supply-chain and fintech patent disputes
Established that distributed ledger security ≠ business method
Case 4: Tata Consultancy Services v. State of Andhra Pradesh (Supreme Court, 2004)
Relevance
Not a patent case, but crucial for classification of software as a technical product.
Court Held
Software is capable of:
Abstraction
Commercial exploitation
Technical application
Blockchain Implication
Blockchain source code, when tied to:
Hardware nodes
Network protocols
Encryption layers
is not merely abstract logic
This reasoning supports patentability arguments in blockchain disputes.
Case 5: OpenTV Inc. v. Controller of Patents (IPAB, 2015)
Facts
Patent for interactive digital systems
Rejected under Section 3(k)
IPAB Ruling
The correct test is technical advancement
If invention solves a technical problem using software, it may be patentable
Blockchain Relevance
Used extensively in:
Smart contract patent arguments
Tokenization system disputes
Blockchain-based DRM patents
Case 6: Alibaba Group Blockchain Patent Oppositions (Indian Patent Office, 2018–2021)
(Administrative decisions, not High Court judgments)
Context
Alibaba filed multiple blockchain-related patents in India
Several faced pre-grant oppositions
Grounds Raised
Algorithms and cryptographic methods
Business method disguised as technical invention
Outcome Pattern
Claims survived only when linked to hardware or network architecture
Pure ledger logic rejected
Importance
Demonstrates how blockchain patent disputes are actually resolved in India
4. Nature of Blockchain Patent Disputes in India
| Type of Dispute | Common Examples |
|---|---|
| Patentability | Consensus mechanism, smart contracts |
| Infringement | Banking blockchain platforms |
| Opposition | Supply-chain blockchain patents |
| Licensing | Fintech and telecom blockchain use |
| Government use | Land records, identity systems |
5. Why Indian Courts Are Cautious with Blockchain Patents
Risk of monopolizing foundational technology
Overlap with open-source blockchain frameworks
Difficulty distinguishing:
Algorithm vs. technical process
Public interest concerns in fintech and governance
6. Current Legal Position (Summary)
Blockchain patents are not banned in India
They must:
Show technical effect
Be tied to system architecture
Go beyond mere business logic
Most disputes are resolved at Patent Office level
Courts rely on software patent jurisprudence
RELATED Blog
comments