RPC:Bilski Brief-John Sutton

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Revision as of 12:26, 14 February 2011 by Rcalkin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "John Sutton: retired patent lawyer Disagrees with Federal circuit decision, which gave validity to patent. #Bilski method is nothing more than typical commodity trading, not th...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

John Sutton: retired patent lawyer

Disagrees with Federal circuit decision, which gave validity to patent.

  1. Bilski method is nothing more than typical commodity trading, not the work of an artisan. Commercial actions are not inventions. no evidence that commercial trading is a useful art. also manipulating the marteplace does not provide advantages to the public for the exertion of the individual.


  1. Processes do work, and may be an application of a law or principle, but the principle itself is not patentable. Nature's handiwork cannot be patented. Also, giving this a patent does not promote progress in the field.
  1. no definitive test is grounds for patent ship, just the law