In what to me is unabashedly good news a federal appeals court has denied a man’s claim to a business process patent on the grounds that such patents do not meet the definition under patent law:
WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled against a man trying to patent a business idea, a decision with far-ranging implications for the financial services and high-tech industries, which have major players on both sides of the issue.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled against Bernard Bilski, who wanted to patent a method for hedging against weather-related effects on businesses. Because his process did not involve a particular machine and did not physically transform anything, the court said, the process was not eligible for a patent.
Relying heavily on 1970s-era U.S. Supreme Court decisions that established the “machine-or-transformation test,” Chief Judge Paul Michel wrote for a nine-judge majority that Bilski’s patent application did not meet this definition of “process” under patent law.
The court affirmed the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s denial of Bilski’s patent, saying the agency’s interpretation of the “process” was correct.
I’ll be a lot more encouraged when a major company’s patent is denied rather than a private individual’s. Frankly, I doubt that the Patent Office has either the staff or expertise to evaluate such patents and they’ve got quite enough to do without needing to determine whether a business process is the business equivalent of the wheelbarrow.
