Brief of Public Knowledge: Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International and CLS Services Ltd.

US Supreme Court Brief of Public Knowledge No. 13-298 (U.S. 2014)

USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 14-7

40 Pages Posted: 8 Mar 2014 Last revised: 15 Mar 2014

See all articles by Jack I. Lerner

Jack I. Lerner

University of California, Irvine School of Law

Charles Duan

Cornell University - Cornell Tech NYC; American University - Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property; R Street Institute

Date Written: March 14, 2014

Abstract

Abstract ideas are not eligible for patenting because, as the Supreme Court has steadfastly maintained, certain fundamental subject matter must be fixed in the public domain, so that patents may serve their constitutional mandate to “promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts.” Being the basic tools of innovation, abstract ideas must remain available to the public; to do otherwise would impede innovation more than promote it.

This case tests how far a patent may encroach on that valuable domain reserved to innovators, creators, and the public. Petitioner holds patents to computer technology. The patent claims at issue are lengthy and detailed, some over two hundred words long. But those claims actually cover very simple ideas; the verbose language is a mere facade masking basic concepts.

To demonstrate this, amici have implemented one of those 200-word claims — in just 7 lines of computer code.

This computer program shows that the patent claims are directed to nothing more than an abstract idea implemented on a general-purpose computer, which should not be patent-eligible. To hold otherwise would contravene the Supreme Court’s precedent and undermine the rationale for unpatentability of abstract ideas. Such “abstract-idea-plus-computer” patents would be effective monopolies on the basic tools of innovation, a result that the Supreme Court has adamantly rejected.

To prevent further errors of this sort, amici identify three points of clarification on the law of subject matter eligibility, and urged the Supreme Court to enunciate these specific points. Doing so not only will correct the judgment below and guide the lower courts, but also will ensure that those valuable basic tools of innovation remain available to all.

* This brief was prepared with the help of University of Southern California Intellectual and Technology Law Clinic interns Michelle Lee (J.D. Candidate, 2015) and Mikhail Brandon (J.D. Candidate, 2014) under the supervision of Professor Jack Lerner.

Keywords: patents, subject matter eligibility, patentable subject matter

Suggested Citation

Lerner, Jack I. and Duan, Charles, Brief of Public Knowledge: Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International and CLS Services Ltd. (March 14, 2014). US Supreme Court Brief of Public Knowledge No. 13-298 (U.S. 2014), USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 14-7, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2405553 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2405553

Jack I. Lerner (Contact Author)

University of California, Irvine School of Law ( email )

401 E. Peltason Dr.
Ste. 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-1000
United States
949-824-7684 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/lerner/

Charles Duan

Cornell University - Cornell Tech NYC ( email )

111 8th Avenue #302
New York, NY 10011
United States

American University - Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property ( email )

4801 Massachusetts Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20016
United States

R Street Institute ( email )

1212 New York Ave NW Suite 900
Washington, DC 20009
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
56
Abstract Views
506
rank
493,434
PlumX Metrics