Gottschalk v. Benson (JWB)

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Revision as of 16:01, 6 February 2011 by Josh Bradley (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==The Case== *Gottschalk, acting Commissioner of Patents (petitioner) *Respondent developed method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pur...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

The Case

  • Gottschalk, acting Commissioner of Patents (petitioner)
  • Respondent developed method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pure binary numbers
  • ruled merely a series of mathematical calculations or mental steps (not a patentable “process”)
  • Claims 8 and 13 rejected by PTO but sustained by Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
    • claims are generalized formulation for programs to solve mathematical problems of converting one form to another
  • Supreme Court reversed
    • conversion can be done by humans, or by current computers (takes longer)
    • Phenomena of nature, though just discovered, mental processes, and abstract intellectual concepts are not patentable
    • Transformation and reduction of an article "to a different state or thing" is the clue to the patentability of a process claim that does not include particular machines
    • the patent would wholly pre-empt the mathematical formula and in practical effect would be a patent on the algorithm itself