Comments on: Bilski Arguments Complete at the US Supreme Court

By: Looking Ahead to TiVo v. Dish at the Federal Circuit | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Tue, 07 Sep 2010 22:39:19 +0000

[...] 9, 2010 will be a busy day for the Federal Circuit indeed. On this first anniversary of the Bil ski oral arguments at the United States Supreme Court the Federal Circuit has scheduled two en banc hearings. Second [...]

By: Another Day Without Bilski Decision, What Does it Mean? | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:01:32 +0000

[...] Supreme Court held oral arguments in the Bilski case on November 9, 2009 (See Bilski Arguments Complete at the US Supreme Court and A Birds Eye View of the Bilski Oral Argument) and that means we have now been waiting 6 months [...]

By: The Wait Continues: Another Day Without a Bilski Decision | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Mon, 24 May 2010 16:59:16 +0000

[...] For those needing proof of the importance of the Bilski case the first evidence was the fact that the general admission line for the Bilski oral argument formed in front of the United States Supreme Court building at midnight the evening before the oral argument. By the time the public was ushered into the Supreme Court chamber over 300 people were in line and only about 50 would be given a seat for the full argument. All the other seats were taken up by members of the press (including myself) and members of the Supreme Court Bar. The remainder of those in line took turns being ushered in to watch a few minutes of the oral argument. Passersby remarked to those in line, asking what case was so important. When it was explained that it was a patent case most seemed perplexed, but those in the industry know exactly why this case matters so much. It is about patentable subject matter and whether the Supreme Court will cut off at the knees developing technologies. See A Bird’s Eye View of the Bilski Oral Argument and Bilski Arguments Complete at the US Supreme Court. [...]

By: Bilski Tea Leaves: Remembering the Lab Corp. Non-decision | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:35:44 +0000

[...] the Lab Corp. Non-decisionIt has been just over two months since the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Bilski v. Kappos, and we likely have at least several more months to wait for a ruling. Notwithstanding, pundits and [...]

By: Praying the Supremes Get Bilski Right in 2010 | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:31:31 +0000

[...] two months ago the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Bilski v. Kappos, which relates to patentable subject matter; namely what should be allowed to be patented in the [...]

By: IPWatchdog.com Year End Results for 2009 | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:30:17 +0000

[...] Bilski Arguments Complete at the US Supreme Court (6,789) [...]

By: step back

step back — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 22:25:06 +0000

DB,

Hold on there friend.
Last 100 years?
Seriously?

What about Chakarbarty (everything made by man under the sun)?
What about Diamond v. Diehr?

I think that somewhere under those thick “gobbledygook” skulls, some of the SCt. Justices must have at least a hunch or an inkling that much of the prosperity of the USA in the last 100 years was due to inventors like Edison. Bell, the Wright Brothers, etc. and their ability to patent their new fangled inventions.

By: Dale B. Halling

Dale B. Halling — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:56:58 +0000

Step Back,

I am not sure you are right. The Supremes may have drunk the cool aid that patents are inhibiting innovation (invention). The history of the Supreme Ct. in the last 100 years is almost all on the side that thinks patents are evil.

By: step back

step back — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 02:49:45 +0000

MD,

The Justices on the US Supreme Court are not totally ignorant. They fully understand that software is a big business and it is responsible for a significant portion of the USA GDP. So they are not going to out and out kill all software patents.

On the other hand they may become reckless in how they handle the Bilski hedge method question and they may create new law that has unintended consequences.

One of the last big patent cases the SCt managed to mangle was KSR v. Teleflex. The unintended consequences there is that it has made patent prosecution far more expensive than it used to be. The ones who bite the bullet thanks to KSR are the small solo inventors who cannot afford long legalistic battles with the US Patent Office over what constitutes “ordinary creativity” and “common sense”. Let’s hope Bilski does not head in the same direction.

As for patent “validity”, that is a different question than “patent eligible subject matter”. You meant the latter even though you may not have known it. Happy Holidays.

By: Michael Duffy

Michael Duffy — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:30:56 +0000

This article and the associated comments provide exceptional insight into the Bilski case.

As a CEO of a technology start up you have given me great confidence that our software patents will be valid.

Thank you.