Washington, D.C., partner and co-chair of the IP Group, Bob Stoll was recently quoted in an article in IAM titled, “No – the CAFC’s Judge Mayer has not just brought an end to software patents or anything close.”
While a series of decisions this summer – Enfish, Bascom and McRo – helped alleviate concerns from supporters of broader patent subject matter eligibility at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit when it comes to “computer-implemented inventions,” Judge Haldane Robert Mayer’s comments in his written concurrence in Intellectual Venture v. Symantec have caused some to worry again.
Judge Mayer wrote: “Most of the First Amendment concerns associated with patent protection could be avoided if this court were willing to acknowledge that Alice sounded the death knell for software patents. Software lies in the antechamber of patent invention. Because generically-implemented software is an 'idea' insufficiently linked to any defining physical structure other than a standard computer, it is a precursor to technology rather than technology itself.”
IAM asked Bob and other leading commentators in the patent community for their views on the significance of Judge Mayer’s words. Bob wrote:
“I am very concerned about that statement [on Alice sounding the death knell for software patents]. The Alice decision itself said that it was to be narrowly construed to the facts of the case. Alice clearly said that computer implemented processes were patentable subject matter and set forth a two-prong test. Further Alice confirmed that business methods could be patentable. Enfish, Bascom and McRO indisputably refute Mayer’s statement.”
To read the full article, click the link below.