|
||||
|
||||
Brief Amici Curiae of 20 Law and Business Professors in Support of Neither Party in Bilski v. DollMark A. LemleyStanford Law School Michael RischVillanova University School of Law Ted M. SichelmanUniversity of San Diego School of Law R. Polk WagnerUniversity of Pennsylvania Law School August 7, 2009 Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 1485043 Abstract: The patent statutes were wisely drafted with an expansive vision of patentable subject matter. Efforts to graft judicially created limitations onto that expansive scope in the past have proven fruitless and indeed counterproductive. In deciding Bilski v. Doll, the Supreme Court should not impose a requirement that patentable inventions require a machine or the physical transformation of some material. It should instead maintain the rule that patents are available for "anything under the sun made by man," including discoveries of ideas, laws of nature, or natural phenomena, so long as they are implemented in a practical application. In short, the test should be as it has been: where an idea is claimed as applied, it is eligible for patentability, but if it is claimed merely in the abstract it is not.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 44 Keywords: patentable subject matter, Bilski, patent eligibility, business method patents, software patents JEL Classification: K3, O3 working papers seriesDate posted: October 8, 2009Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.610 seconds