Australian Patent Office
in favour of Blockchain…
for the moment
Inspire September 2021
E-commerce giant
Alibaba has had a win
before the Australian
Patent Office in relation
to an application for
their technology which
improves privacy on
the blockchain. In
a recent decision 1 ,
the Delegate found
that Alibaba’s patent
application satisfies the
manner of manufacture
4 requirement, and
that amendments
made to address an
objection were valid
and supported by the
specification as filed.

1 A dvanced New Technologies Co.,
Ltd. [2021] APO 29 (21 July 2021)
The Invention
Background Broadly speaking, the invention
related to a solution to the
consensus problem by way
of blockchain. In blockchain
technology, transaction data needs
to be broadcast to consensus nodes
for the blockchain to work effectively.

However, broadcasting transaction
data can create privacy issues
since transaction data can contain
identifying information, such as
the subject matter of a transaction,
an account address, ID information
and other data, as well as
timestamps, and dates.

The invention was directed to a
method involving generation of a
transaction abstract derived from
the transaction data, but which
obfuscates transaction details
related to privacy. As part of the
method, the consensus nodes accept
the transaction abstract as being
authentic, meaning there would be
no need for all the consensus nodes
to perform consensus verification
on the transaction data per se.

During prosecution of the application,
the Examiner maintained an objection
based on manner of manufacture,
asserting that the invention was
directed to the application of
abstract rules associated with the
implementation of a mere scheme for
the management of transaction data.

Inventive step was initially raised
before being overcome by argument
and amendment by the Applicant.

The examiner then raised objections
on the ground that the specification
didn’t disclose the invention in a
manner which is clear enough and
complete enough for the invention
to be performed by a person
skilled in the relevant art and that
the claims were not supported
by specification. The Applicant
requested to be heard in the matter.