Supreme Court Limits Patents Based On Laws of Nature

New submitter sed quid in infernos writes "The Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion yesterday holding that 'to transform an unpatentable law of nature into a patent-eligible application of such a law, a patent must do more than simply state the law of nature while adding the words "apply it."' The Court invalidated a patent on the process of adjusting medication dosage based on the levels of specific metabolites in the patient's blood. The opinion sets forth a process for determining patent eligibility for patent claims that include a law of nature. The court wrote that the "additional features" that show an application of the law must "provide practical assurance that the [claimed] process is more than a drafting effort." This language suggests that the burden will be on the patentee to prove that its limitations are more than patent attorney tricks.'"

Comments

Patent

[SJHillman]

So I can't patent my method of not falling off the Earth through application of gravity?

Re:Patent

[g0bshiTe]

You forgot something.

Method of not falling off the Earth through application of gravity, apply it.

3M, we don't make the patent, we make it better.

Re:nothing and everything's a law of nature

[dtmos]

This is why all notions of property are arbitrary.

Could you give me my wallet, there in your pocket?