Did big patent ruling doom software patents?

Mark-

While the invention in Bilski was a pure business method the Federal Circuit went much further than it needed to in order to address the invention at hand. If you read the decision you will see that the decision does indeed have significant implications for software patents. As you point out the language of the Federal Circuit talked about a process, which by definition would include software given that software is a set of instructions.

-Gene

Mark-

While the invention in Bilski was a pure business method the Federal Circuit went much further than it needed to in order to address the invention at hand. If you read the decision you will see that the decision does indeed have significant implications for software patents. As you point out the language of the Federal Circuit talked about a process, which by definition would include software given that software is a set of instructions.

-Gene

I don’t think the Bilski case was a big hit on patents, but I’m convinced that it’s time to eliminate the software patent process, and simply use the existing copyright and trademark protection for software. See my article on blog.startupprofessionals.com titled “Software Patents: Time for a Change” for specifics.

Marty Zwilling, Founder & CEO, Startup Professionals, Inc.

I don’t think the Bilski case was a big hit on patents, but I’m convinced that it’s time to eliminate the software patent process, and simply use the existing copyright and trademark protection for software. See my article on blog.startupprofessionals.com titled “Software Patents: Time for a Change” for specifics.

Marty Zwilling, Founder & CEO, Startup Professionals, Inc.

Roger:

Software patents were not at issue in Bilski. A pure business method claim was evaluated.

The Bilski case clarified the test for patentability of methods or processes. The case provides a two-prong “machine-or-transformation” test for patent-eligible subject matter: “A claimed process is surely patent-eligible subject matter under § 101 if: (1) it is tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or (2) it transforms a particular article into a different state or thing.”

Yes, a software patent may represent a business method. But a software patent can and often does involve something completely different, such as processing streaming media, measuring quality of service, load balancing, throughput enhancement, and many others. Most technology related software claims will easily pass the Bilski test.

A pure business method that is neither tied to a particular machine or apparatus nor transforms a particular article into a different state or thing is not patentable.

Best,

Mark A. Goldstein, Esq.
SoCal IP Law Group LLP
Westlake Village, CA 91362

Roger:

Software patents were not at issue in Bilski. A pure business method claim was evaluated.

The Bilski case clarified the test for patentability of methods or processes. The case provides a two-prong “machine-or-transformation” test for patent-eligible subject matter: “A claimed process is surely patent-eligible subject matter under § 101 if: (1) it is tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or (2) it transforms a particular article into a different state or thing.”

Yes, a software patent may represent a business method. But a software patent can and often does involve something completely different, such as processing streaming media, measuring quality of service, load balancing, throughput enhancement, and many others. Most technology related software claims will easily pass the Bilski test.

A pure business method that is neither tied to a particular machine or apparatus nor transforms a particular article into a different state or thing is not patentable.

Best,

Mark A. Goldstein, Esq.
SoCal IP Law Group LLP
Westlake Village, CA 91362