Some had hoped that the Supreme Court would find a way to curb the matter in the recent Bilski case.
The appeals court rejected the Bilski patent in stronger terms that suggested all patents lacking this qualification would be invalid.
FORBES: The Supreme Court Keeps Business-Method Patents Alive
Assuming the court upholds Bilski, the remaining question is how far it goes in defining the new boundaries of patent law.
FORBES: Bilski May Take Down Business Method Patents With Him
The practical effect of the Bilski ruling will be limited, lawyers said, but it will definitely mean more lucrative patent litigation.
The Supreme Court tackled these questions last year in Bilski v.
FORBES: Mayo Clinic Case Asks If A Doctor's Method Can Be Patented
Warsaw and Bilski began working on a hedging system in the early 1990s designed to shelter both consumers and utilities against big swings in energy prices and demand.
FORBES: The Supreme Court Keeps Business-Method Patents Alive
So the Supremes have the opportunity to uphold Bilski and still get a shot in at the Federal Circuit if they include language that invalidates patents like the Prometheus process.
FORBES: Bilski May Take Down Business Method Patents With Him
All of which sort of makes you wonder why neither Bilski or Clish counter-claimed for defamation and other damages based upon this seemingly frivolous case, at least as against them.
It may wind up disappointing blockbuster-ruling fans, however, as the court avoided making a definitive statement about the boundaries of patent law in the much-discussed Bilski case last year and may do so again.
Since a federal appeals court affirmed the USPTO in In re Bilski, lower courts around the country have adopted the same logic, saying patents must involve a machine or a process that transforms some type of material substance.
FORBES: Bilski May Take Down Business Method Patents With Him
Bilski might leave that question open.
FORBES: Bilski May Take Down Business Method Patents With Him
应用推荐