Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
Does this also cover patenting genes too?
Because I've never understood how you can patent a gene someone already had.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Does this mean we can finally get a review for the patent on swinging sideways on a swing? The patent in question does not merely add "apply it" to suspended mass behavior -- it adds "apply it, but sideways."
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Math is the first thing I thought of when I read the headline. Math!
How many software patents are simply applied math?
We may have found a slippery slope that works in our favor for once.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.