3 ms·
Bilski v. Kappos: Business Methods Not Out, Software Still Patentable
- _delirium 16y agoIt seems more like a non-decision as far as broad statements go. Only 4 justices fully signed the majority/plurality opinion, four signed Stevens's opinion (counting Stevens), and Scalia sort of indirectly signed onto both: he signed parts of the majority opinion, and the part of Breyer's opinion which aimed to lay out the common ground between the other two opinions. The court definitely passed up an opportunity to totally axe business-method and/or software patents, but it seems it didn't really affirm them either, at least not in any sort of clear language. It seems that 5 of the members (Stevens, Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Scalia) actually lean the opposite way, with a fairly strong presumption against business-method patents.
- brlewis 16y agoRegarding software patents, they did say they were following their own precedents of Benson, Flook and Diehr, and not endorsing State Street. Benson and Flook are precedent for invalidating just about every software patent out there. Diehr clarifies that having software as an element of a claim does not automatically make that claim nonstatutory. If people paid attention to what those precedents actually said, then this opinion would be a slapdown of software patents. But since people obviously don't, it isn't. It would be interesting if a lawyer would weigh in and say whether there's some legal principle restricting the scope of what can be said in this kind of opinion, or whether the Court is just being a bunch of wusses.