EB: GOTTSCHALK v. BENSON, 409 U.S. 63 (1972)

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Revision as of 16:17, 6 February 2011 by Ebingle (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==The Situation== *Benson develops a "method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pure binary numbers." *Gottschalk is the commissioner of ...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

The Situation

  • Benson develops a "method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pure binary numbers."
  • Gottschalk is the commissioner of patents who originally rejected the patent, Benson appealed and won - Supreme Court grants centiorari

Decision

  • Benson's patent is invalid (sustaining the examiners original decision, but reversing the Appeals court decision)

Reasoning

  • You can't patent an idea - if you discover a "phenomenon of nature" you can't claim a monopoly on it unless you apply the law of nature to a "new and useful end"
    • The claims of Benson's patent were sweeping - claiming all rights to the process developed (whether by a computer or by hand)
  • A process is patentable if it transforms or reduces the subject matter to a "different state or thing"
    • Benson's patent would "wholy pre-empt the mathematical formula and in practical effect woul db e a patent on the algorithm itself."
      • In other words, Benson's patent is for a mathematical formula/algorithm, and these are ruled to be ideas, which alone are not patentable
  • Important outcome: You can't patent a computer program