≡ Menu

Supreme Court’s Bilski decision leaves door ajar for patenting at least some business methods

A couple of hours ago the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its much-anticipated Bilski decision. The Court seems to have left the door open for patenting at least some business methods, but the justices were pretty divided:

  • All nine justices agreed that the particular claimed method of hedging risk was not patentable — but that contrary to the Federal Circuit’s view, the machine-or-transformation test was not the exclusive test of potential patentability.
  • Justice Kennedy (joined by Roberts, Thomas, and Alito) said in essence that business-method patents were entirely appropriate for a modern information-based economy.
  • Retiring Justice Stevens (joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor) disagreed completely, saying in essence that business methods should be per se unpatentable.
  • Justice Scalia didn’t join either of these two sides.

Unfortunately, Justice Kennedy’s opinion didn’t offer much guidance about what distinguished a potentially-patentable business method from an unpatentable one.

The Court’s decision doubtless means more billable hours for lawyers who write and litigate business-method patents.

I’m not sure businesses will be quite so thrilled about the uncertainty left by the decision.

Comments on this entry are closed.

On Contracts is Stephen Fry proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache