Without software a computer is nothing more than a box of miscellaneous pieces that can’t do much of anything. They do make nice sticky-note holders, and they collect dust extremely well, but a computer without software is about as useless as a door without a knob, a clock without hands or a car without an engine. In other words, a computer without software is completely and totally useless. It is the software that directs a computer to do unique and often wonderful things, and it is the software that provides the innovative spark, not the machine. We do nothing but an injustice to ourselves to ignore this reality.
Perhaps the single most beneficial piece of legislation that the United States Congress has enacted during my lifetime is the Bayh-Dole Act, codified in Chapter 18 of Title 35 of the United States Code, enacted in 1980 and named after co-sponsored Senators Birch Bayh of Indiana and Robert Dole of Kansas. Everyone who knows anything about patent law, technology transfer…
While it is true that the Federal Circuit has largely made “software” unpatentable, they did not prevent the patenting of a computer that accomplishes a certain defined task. Given that a computer is for all intents and purposes completely useless without software, you can still protect software in an indirect manner by protecting the computer itself, and by protecting a computer implemented process.
Until recently the Obama Administration had not taken any particularly strong or controversial stances with respect to intellectual property protection. Sure, President Obama appointed a former RIAA attorney to a top spot in the Department of Justice, asked for study of open source initiatives for the federal government and has complained about counterfeiting and copyright infringement abroad. On patent matters…
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has been out in front on patent and intellectual property issues for years, and he is at it once again. Senator Hatch has recently been very active with respect to writing op-ed articles explaining what all of us in the patent community have known for a very long time. My hope is that his profile will…
On Wednesday, June 17, 2009, while I was on the road in Boston teaching the PLI Patent Bar Review Course I was invited to chat with David Gleason, the host of State of the Nation, which is a radio talk show that airs in South Africa. It seems that Mr. Gleason and his staff were devoting a significant portion of…
First, let me say that it is really a complete misnomer to refer to “gene patents” because despite what the popular press may write, and perhaps believe, genes are not patented. Nevertheless, I will cave into the masses and concede (at least for now) the linguistic high ground and refer to gene-related innovations that are examined by patent authorities and…
About a week ago I received a fairly typical e-mail from an individual who was inquiring about whether I could help provide certain services. As you can probably imagine, I get inquiries from people looking for all different kinds of legal services, and I also get a lot of e-mails from those who have great ideas and want to sell…
My position is that software must be patentable, or 500 years of patent laws make no sense. The reason that software must be patentable is that software can be an inseparable part of both manufacturing processes and electronic devices. A patent for such items must crucially include the software components of the invention, or the patent would be incomplete.
The Wall Street Journal Online just published an article titled Why Technologists Want Fewer Patents, which will apparently appear in the June 15, 2009, edition of the paper on page A13, under the heading “Opinion.” The article discusses the US Supreme Court agreeing to hear Bilski v. Doll, which will decide the fate of at least some business method patents,…
The June 15, 2009, edition of Business Week has an interesting article about innovation by Michael Mandel, which concludes that during the last decade US innovation has failed to deliver on the hyped promises, and this failure of innovation may have contributed to the economic woes we are now experiencing. Indeed, this article is interesting for many reasons. First, how…
Mike Drummond is the Editor of Inventors Digest, perhaps the most popular and widely read magazine in the innovation space. While I like to consider myself a commentator who can type, Mike is a bona fide journalist with credentials that most only dream about. He was a Pulitzer Prize finalist, a war correspondent in Iraq and the acclaimed author of…
I just spoke with Mark Malek, a patent attorney at the firm I am with – Zies Widerman & Malek. Mark had an interesting conversation earlier today with a patent examiner who shall remain nameless. The purpose of the call was to inquire about the status of a particular application that had been filed over 4 years ago and which…
Ever since this decision was rendered there has been rampant speculation as to what Bilski means and how it will be interpreted. As one who works in this area and one with my own patent application pending in class 705, I was greatly interested both professionally and personally. Thankfully, I can report that it does not seem as if Bilski is turning out to be the impediment to patentability that many feared. In fact, based on what is going on at the USPTO one could make a convincing argument that it is actually getting easier to obtain patents that related to software and computer related processes.
As I was reading IP Kat this morning I learned that yesterday the UK Intellectual Property Office announced that green inventions will be fast tracked through the patent process. David Lammy, Minister for Intellectual Property, announced the launch an initiative which will enable inventions with an environmental benefit to be given priority within the patent system. About six weeks ago…