France Patent System

France (via EPC) has NO grace period. Any public disclosure before the patent filing date is prior art under Article 54 EPC (incorporated into French law via the CPI — Code de la propriété intellectuelle). An applicant's own pre-filing disclosure is prior art regardless of when it was made. There is a very narrow exception for disclosures made at officially recognized international exhibitions (Article 55 EPC), but this does not apply to ordinary scientific publications, conference presentations, or product demonstrations. File before any public disclosure.

France follows EPC Article 52, which excludes programs for computers 'as such' from patentability. INPI and French courts apply the same technical character approach as the EPO: software with a technical character — producing a technical effect beyond the normal physical interactions of software and hardware — can be patented. Software for controlling industrial processes, communications systems, embedded systems, and similar technical applications has historically been grantable in France. Pure business software, algorithms without technical application, and abstract game mechanics cannot be patented.

French law has specific rules for employee inventions that differ significantly from US practice. Inventions made by an employee in the performance of their work duties are automatically owned by the employer — no separate assignment agreement is required. However, if an employee makes an invention outside the scope of their work duties (using their own means, not related to the employer's business), the employee retains ownership. Inventions made with employer resources but outside employment duties are subject to a right of attribution — the employer can claim rights in exchange for compensation. Employees who invent mission-related inventions are entitled to additional compensation (rémunération supplémentaire) if the invention is of exceptional value — a right that cannot be waived by contract.

Patent infringement and invalidity actions in France are heard by the Tribunal judiciaire de Paris (Paris Judicial Tribunal), which has exclusive jurisdiction over patent matters — all 12 other regional tribunals are excluded. The Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal) hears appeals, with further appeals to the Cour de cassation (Supreme Court of France) on points of law only. French courts do not bifurcate — infringement and invalidity are heard together (or at least coordinated). France does not have a jury system for patent cases. Average time to trial: 18–24 months. Preliminary injunctions (ordonnances de référé) are available and French courts have historically been willing to grant them in clear infringement cases.

For most international applicants, a European patent (EP) validated in France is the better choice — not a French national patent via INPI. Here's why: (1) The EPO examines the application in depth (novelty, inventive step, industrial applicability) before granting — giving you a stronger, EPO-examined patent. INPI historically did not perform a substantive examination on French national patents (a 2020 reform introduced an optional examination, but this has not changed practice significantly); (2) If you are also filing in Germany, the UK, Italy, the Netherlands, or other European countries, an EP application covers all of them with a single prosecution. A French national patent covers only France; (3) Since June 1, 2023, the Unitary Patent is available — a single EPO grant covering France and 16+ other EU/UPC states, without separate national validation fees in each country. The Unitary Patent is increasingly the most cost-effective option for applicants seeking broad European coverage; (4) EP patents are enforceable in the UPC (Unified Patent Court), enabling EU-wide enforcement from a single UPC proceeding at the Paris Local Division. There is one scenario where a French national patent is useful: if you want patent protection only in France and don't want or need other European countries. French national patent prosecution at INPI is sometimes used by French SMEs and individual inventors who want domestic protection at lower cost than an EP application. For startups and international companies, the standard recommendation is: file a PCT application (or direct EP application), prosecute at the EPO, and validate in France (or request Unitary Patent status) upon grant.

No. France (as an EPC member state) applies Article 54 EPC, which defines novelty as absolute — any prior disclosure of the invention before the filing date (or priority date) constitutes prior art, regardless of who made the disclosure or whether the applicant made it themselves. There is a very narrow exception under Article 55(1)(b) EPC for disclosures made at officially recognized international exhibitions (listed by the Bureau International des Expositions), but this exception does not apply to: scientific journal publications, conference presentations and posters, investor presentations, product demonstrations, press releases, social media posts, grant applications, or thesis defenses. If you made a public disclosure before filing, and it is not covered by the Article 55 exhibition exception, that disclosure is prior art against your French (and European) patent application. The US has a 12-month grace period for the inventor's own disclosures under AIA § 102(b)(1)(A). US applicants who have made a public disclosure and then decide to file in France must do so before the 12-month US grace period expires — but they must understand that their own disclosure is still prior art in France regardless of the US grace period. The practical rule: file your patent application (US or PCT) before any public disclosure to preserve international patent rights. If you already disclosed and want US protection only, you have 12 months. If you want French/European protection, it may already be lost.

The UPC Local Division Paris is one of the primary first-instance courts of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), which has jurisdiction over Unitary Patents and EP patents not opted out of the UPC system. The UPC entered into force on June 1, 2023. The Paris Local Division is significant for several reasons: (1) It builds on France's existing, highly active patent court tradition — the Tribunal judiciaire de Paris was already one of Europe's busiest patent infringement courts; (2) UPC proceedings at the Paris Local Division are primarily in French, with an option for English proceedings upon request — this makes it accessible for both French and international litigants; (3) A UPC judgment from Paris is enforceable across all UPC participating states — 17+ EU member states — from a single proceeding, without needing parallel national court proceedings in each country; (4) The Paris Local Division has jurisdiction to order preliminary injunctions enforceable across the UPC territory; (5) France is home to a significant number of IP-intensive industries (luxury goods, aerospace, pharma, agri-food, automotive), so Paris is a natural venue for commercially important patent disputes in these sectors. For patent holders with Unitary Patents or EP patents in France (not opted out of UPC), the Paris Local Division is a powerful enforcement tool. For companies operating in France as defendants, the UPC requires a new litigation strategy — opting out of UPC jurisdiction for existing EP patents (during the 7-year sunrise period) is an important decision that affects how those patents can be challenged and enforced.

French law (Articles L611-7 and L611-8 of the Code de la propriété intellectuelle, CPI) draws a clear three-way distinction for employee inventions, which differs significantly from US law: (1) Mission inventions (inventions de mission): inventions made in the performance of the employee's work duties — especially inventions that are part of their research or creative mission — are automatically owned by the employer. No separate assignment agreement is required; ownership vests in the employer by operation of law. However, the employee is entitled to 'additional compensation' (rémunération supplémentaire) if the invention has exceptional commercial value. This compensation right is mandatory — it cannot be waived by contract; (2) Attributable inventions (inventions attribuables): inventions made outside the employee's work duties but using the employer's resources, means, or know-how. The employer has a right to claim these inventions (within 4 months of disclosure), but must pay 'fair price' (juste prix) compensation to the employee. If the employer does not claim the invention within 4 months, ownership remains with the employee; (3) Employee inventions (inventions propres): inventions made entirely outside work duties, using the employee's own means, and unrelated to the employer's field of business. These belong exclusively to the employee — the employer has no rights. Compare to US law: in the US, absent an employment agreement (PIIA/CIIA), employees own their inventions even if made during employment hours using employer resources (with very limited 'shop right' exceptions). The standard US practice is for employees to sign PIIAs/CIIAs at hire, assigning all work-related inventions to the employer. In France, mission inventions are automatically owned by the employer without any assignment agreement, but the employer has mandatory compensation obligations that US employers do not face.

Yes — software can be patented in France, subject to the technical character requirement derived from EPC Article 52. Article 52(2)(c) EPC excludes 'programs for computers' from patentability, but only 'as such' (Article 52(3)). The 'as such' limitation means that software is excluded only if it has no technical character beyond the software itself. Software that achieves a technical effect — improving the performance of a computer system, controlling a technical process, solving a technical problem — can be patented in France (via an EP patent) and at INPI (for French national patents). INPI and French courts follow EPO practice on software patentability. The EPO's approach (as applied in France) is more permissive than the post-Alice USPTO standard. Specifically: software inventions that would fail the Alice/Mayo two-step at the USPTO (for lacking an 'inventive concept' or being directed to an 'abstract idea') may still be patentable in France if they achieve a technical effect. Examples of patentable software in France: AI/ML algorithms for technical applications (industrial control, image processing for medical diagnosis, network optimization); embedded software for technical devices; data compression algorithms applied to specific technical systems; computer-implemented inventions in telecommunications. Software that cannot be patented in France: pure algorithms without technical application; software for mental acts or games without technical implementation; business methods implemented purely in software without technical effect. For a software startup seeking European patent protection, France (via the EP route) offers a more favorable patent eligibility landscape than the US, particularly for AI, ML, and data processing inventions.