3 ms·
"This is quite different from the US Patent office," Today it's different from US patent office. For most of the US Patent office's history, it was the same.
by chetanahuja 11y ago
"This is quite different from the US Patent office,"
Today it's different from US patent office. For most of the US Patent office's history, it was the same.
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_Bank_%26_Trust_Co._v._Signature_Financial_Group,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_Bank_%26_Trust_Co....
- orionblastar 11y agoLink must have moved here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_Bank_%26_Trust_Co._v._Signature_Financial_Group,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_Bank_%26_Trust_Co.... But yeah I see now that US patent office used to be like India, but now it accepts any patent.
- emj 11y agoMETA: Seems like the . is stripped from the end of links. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_Bank_%26_Trust_Co._v._Signature_Financial_Group,_Inc.
- jcranmer 11y agoThe State St. is no longer valid precedent. SCOTUS went well out of its way to emphasize that the State St. decision was completely insane and wrong in Bilski v Kappos even as it struggled to come to grips with a coherent definition. Nevertheless, it's been pretty clear that SCOTUS would rule just about any software patent invalid.