Abstract
The recent Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decision in State Street Bank and Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group has opened up a new area, methods of doing business, as patentable subject matter. This paper explores the institutional competence of the United States Patent Office (USPTO) and the CAFC to administer patents in this new field. Analogies are drawn with another new technology, computer programming, which was only recently made eligible for patent protection. It is argued that entrenched doctrinal methods in the CAFC and historical staffing preferences in the USPTO make it likely that patents will be granted on innovations that are obvious, at least in the non-technical sense of that word. A suggestion is made for a legislative change which might ameliorate the problems caused by such patents, if they are issued, and the paper concludes with some speculations on the extent of the possible harm from such patents.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.