I agree with you whole-heartedly on these patents. But... I think the point that you're missing is that the Supreme Court is like a meta-court. You don't go the

I agree with you whole-heartedly on these patents. But... I think the point that you're missing is that the Supreme Court is like a meta-court. You don't go there to appeal your case, you go there to appeal specific decisions and interpretations of the law. IMO, from a lawyers vantage point, what is the difference between a patent covering a software method (like encoding music) and a medical procedure? There really isn't any. Both are equally offensive to the folks who practice in these fields -- I have yet to meet a programmer in favor of software patents, and I'm sure doctors will feel the same way. The problem is that the law as written is that software patents ARE ok. As long as that is true, how could any judge make a case that medical procedures are not?