Difference between revisions of "Gottschalk v. Benson (901422128)"
From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search (Created page with "Read for 2/7/11 ==Reading Notes== ==Class Notes==") |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Reading Notes== | ==Reading Notes== | ||
| + | *Benson filed a patent for a method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pure binary numbers | ||
| + | **Ruled as merely a series of mathematical calculations or mental steps | ||
| + | *Claims were not limited to any specific machine, technology, use, etc. | ||
| + | *Need to determine if the method described is a "process" | ||
| + | **The procedure in the present claim is an algorithm | ||
| + | *The conversion from BCD to pure binary can be done mentally using a table | ||
| + | **This method varies the ordinary human steps by changing the order and symbolism and by taking subtotals after each operation | ||
| + | *Cite previous examples of including a law into a process | ||
| + | **Claims need to be limited to a specific arrangement of machinery or something similar | ||
| + | ===Laws of patentability=== | ||
| + | *Phenomena of nature, mental processes, and abstract intellectual concepts cannot be patented | ||
| + | **A novel and useful structure created with the air of one of these may be patentable | ||
| + | *The key to the patentability of a process which does not involve a specific machine is | ||
| + | <blockquote>A process is a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or a series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced '''to a different state or thing'''.</blockquote> | ||
| + | **Process patent must either use a particular machine or apparatus or must change the articles or materials to a different state or thing | ||
| + | *Creation of programs has grown substantially without patent protection | ||
| + | ==Class Notes== | ||
| + | *Benson had patent for computer program, Gottschalk was the Patent Commissioner who denied him a patent | ||
| + | **Can appeal applications during the process and take it to the appeals within the PTO | ||
| + | *Claims 8 and 13 are in question | ||
| + | **Converted BCD to pure binary | ||
| + | *Won at the appellate level but the patent was then rejected by the USSC | ||
| + | **Cannot patent an algorithm | ||
| + | *Decided in 1972 | ||
| + | *Decided that the claim was just too broad and fundamental | ||
| + | **A process without a specific application is usually not good | ||
| + | *Talk about the President’s Commission | ||
| + | **Basically they don’t have the ability to examine computer programs, so they are unpatentable | ||
| − | == | + | ===Patentable Subject Matter=== |
| + | *Section 101 lays out what is patentable – process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter | ||
| + | **More recently standards have said everything is more or less patentable under 101 | ||
| + | *Things that cannot be patented for risk that they impede the promotion of useful arts | ||
| + | **Ideas (reduction to practice) | ||
| + | **Natural phenomena | ||
| + | ***Even if newly discovered | ||
| + | **Scientific truth | ||
| + | **Mathematical expression | ||
| + | *Things that can be patented under 101 | ||
| + | **’’’Structure’’’ created with knowledge of above | ||
| + | **’’’Application’’’ of the laws | ||
| + | **A process resulting in physical changes | ||
| + | *Science has a natural set of building blocks but the promotion should occur at the next level | ||
| + | *Dividing line between a process that is or is not patentable is the application | ||
| + | *The existence of first principles (basic laws) provides starting points for further invention | ||
| + | **Taking these away reduces the ability of others to build upon | ||
| + | *Talk about the President’s Commission | ||
| + | **Basically they don’t have the ability to examine computer programs, so they are unpatentable | ||
Latest revision as of 23:08, 16 February 2011
Read for 2/7/11
Reading Notes
- Benson filed a patent for a method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pure binary numbers
- Ruled as merely a series of mathematical calculations or mental steps
- Claims were not limited to any specific machine, technology, use, etc.
- Need to determine if the method described is a "process"
- The procedure in the present claim is an algorithm
- The conversion from BCD to pure binary can be done mentally using a table
- This method varies the ordinary human steps by changing the order and symbolism and by taking subtotals after each operation
- Cite previous examples of including a law into a process
- Claims need to be limited to a specific arrangement of machinery or something similar
Laws of patentability
- Phenomena of nature, mental processes, and abstract intellectual concepts cannot be patented
- A novel and useful structure created with the air of one of these may be patentable
- The key to the patentability of a process which does not involve a specific machine is
A process is a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or a series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced to a different state or thing.
- Process patent must either use a particular machine or apparatus or must change the articles or materials to a different state or thing
- Creation of programs has grown substantially without patent protection
Class Notes
- Benson had patent for computer program, Gottschalk was the Patent Commissioner who denied him a patent
- Can appeal applications during the process and take it to the appeals within the PTO
- Claims 8 and 13 are in question
- Converted BCD to pure binary
- Won at the appellate level but the patent was then rejected by the USSC
- Cannot patent an algorithm
- Decided in 1972
- Decided that the claim was just too broad and fundamental
- A process without a specific application is usually not good
- Talk about the President’s Commission
- Basically they don’t have the ability to examine computer programs, so they are unpatentable
Patentable Subject Matter
- Section 101 lays out what is patentable – process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter
- More recently standards have said everything is more or less patentable under 101
- Things that cannot be patented for risk that they impede the promotion of useful arts
- Ideas (reduction to practice)
- Natural phenomena
- Even if newly discovered
- Scientific truth
- Mathematical expression
- Things that can be patented under 101
- ’’’Structure’’’ created with knowledge of above
- ’’’Application’’’ of the laws
- A process resulting in physical changes
- Science has a natural set of building blocks but the promotion should occur at the next level
- Dividing line between a process that is or is not patentable is the application
- The existence of first principles (basic laws) provides starting points for further invention
- Taking these away reduces the ability of others to build upon
- Talk about the President’s Commission
- Basically they don’t have the ability to examine computer programs, so they are unpatentable
