Classification and the future of the IPC - the EPO view

After some introductory remarks about the need for classification schemes to enable search of patent and similar documentation, the paper outlines the features of the ECLA classification and ICO indexing systems applied at the EPO. ECLA is essentially a derivative of the IPC, with more detailed classification in many areas. It also has some areas in which the classification has been completely rewritten from the IPC, simplified or left unchanged. ECLA is a dynamic, continuously evolving system. It is the responsibility of the EPO search examiners to consider all new patent and related documentation. This documentation is forwarded to them, after family matching to limit the intellectual effort being repeated unnecessarily, using the standard IPC terms printed on the specifications for allocation. The examiners then normally classify those documents according to ECLA. ICO indexing is also applied, primarily to pick up important, but non-inventive features or to record application data in a functional invention. It is also the task of the search examiners to make changes within their specific technical area in the ECLA classification, and to implement those changes throughout their documentation. At the end of 1997, ECLA contained about 120,000 groups compared to 67,000 groups in the sixth edition of the IPC. Of this total, about 83,000 groups are complete. The other 37,000 groups are still linked to the 11,500 IdT groups which, although closed for new documents, still have to be consulted for the search. The paper concludes with a set of proposals to make the IPC revision process more efficient and hence better able to keep pace with the accelerating rate of technological developments in patent information retrieval methods and media. It is proposed, for example, for the Committee of Experts to take the high level policy and similar decisions, with a second tier of three Working Groups, to cover mechanical subject matter, chemistry, and physics and electricity, respectively, with substantial delegated authority. In addition a Conciliation Board would deal with problems arising with implemented schemes. It also concludes that the creation of increasing numbers of batches of searchable subject matter divided chronologically and relating to each edition is a major limitation to the wider use of the detail of the IPC. It suggests that a partial freeze on the IPC would help, with amendments only in those areas where completely new strands of technology emerge.