EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

10.03.17

US Supreme Court Defends Position on Alice, Maintaining/Cementing a Ban on Software Patents Like the Rest of the World

Posted in America, Asia, Europe, Patents at 4:46 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

China is probably one of the few countries where ‘pure’ software patents are accepted (for the sake of mass litigation)

China's trolls

Summary: Software patents are a dying breed as the lion’s share of nations will not recognise them (in courts) and the UPC — an intrusion vector for software patents in Europe — is also not happening

LAST night we found out that the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) won’t be touching any of the cases that can somehow impact Alice, notably the case which only days ago we correctly predicted it would pass on. Section 101 (USPTO), therefore, won’t be changed significantly any time soon. As Patently-O has just put it:

In its first action for the October 2017 term, the Supreme Court has (inter alia) denied Certiorari in three pending Patent Cases:

16-1288 SYNOPSYS, INC. V. MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION
16-1442 ARUNACHALAM V. SAP AMERICA, INC.
16-1427 OLEKSY V. GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.

SCOTUS will not reverse its precedence on software patents any time soon. Software patents are still de facto dead in the US, but the patent microcosm won’t rest in peace.

How about the EPO? Well, currently it’s hard to enforce software patents in Europe because national courts simply say no, and rightly so!

Having said that, the EPO once again pushed the SME lie. It did it again yesterday. It’s an attempt to paint UPC as “good for SMEs” (which is a lie). Also yesterday we saw Penny Gilbert, Peter Damerell and Alex Driver trying to push the UPC with this long article. Someone should explain to Powell Gilbert LLP that the UPC is likely dead (they probably already know that) so that they don’t misinform clients or random readers. The UPC is like a hypothetical project; it’s not even happening and they already leap to it with advice, including the following section about software and business methods:

To what extent can inventions covering software be patented?

Computer programs as such are expressly excluded from patentability, but claims involving computer programs are not excluded if the claimed subject matter has a technical character.

To what extent can inventions covering business methods be patented?

Business methods as such are expressly excluded from patentability. However, like computer programs, business methods may be patentable if the claimed subject matter has a technical character.

As we said quite a few years back, the UPC would be a Trojan horse for software patents in Europe, bypassing national patent laws and enforcing rulings on such patents in pertinent nations in direct contradiction to their laws. We need to stop this.

The EPO appeal boards have long tackled the issue of software patents. I wrote a letter to them (about software patents) almost a decade ago. They’re all about quality control and enforcement of the EPC; in September we saw reports like “Synthon says EPO appeal board has revoked Copaxone API patent” — serving to remind us of the crucial role played by these appeal boards.

Let’s remind ourselves that much of the world now despises and opposes software patents. Laws have accordingly changed, most recently in Australia (we wrote a lot about that last month). In Africa, based on this new article, a company now adopts a terrible strategy by saying “it intends to sharpen its focus on Quiptel’s patented suite of software and technology products and offerings, and also will restructure its content division.”

“Going forward,” it said, “Quiptel’s technology and software patents will now drive the company’s primary business focus.”

Where would they use such patents? Almost no courts would honour such patents anymore. Maybe China? Japan’s courts have become too strict.

Speaking of software patents in Asia, IP Watch has just published this new interview with the Korean IP Commissioner Sung Yunmo. They asked him nothing about software patents which — as we understand it — are sort of banned there. IAM’s Jacob Schindler has this new series about “Patents in Asia” and in it there’s this part about South Korea. Schindler “has reached out to the most trusted patent firms across a range of Asian jurisdictions to prepare the Patents in Asia supplement that follows,” he wrote. “It should serve as a handy reference for chief IP officers over the year to come.”

From the text about South Korea:

To what extent can inventions covering software or computer-implemented inventions be patented?

For a software invention to be granted, certain requirements must be met:

– First, information processing by software should be realised concretely by using hardware (eg, claims should describe involvement of concrete hardware-type components that account for information processing and interaction between them).

– In addition, claims should not involve human activities (as opposed to software processing).

Further, software inventions can be claimed in the form of a method, apparatus, computer-readable medium (storing a computer program) or computer program (stored on a medium). By contrast, claims directed to software, a computer program per se (not stored on a medium) or a program product are not allowed.
To what extent can inventions covering business methods be patented?

Business method inventions are subject to the same requirements as software inventions.

It sounds like more or less the same loopholes which exist in India, New Zealand and Europe. It’s very clear that so-called ‘pure’ software patents are not permitted. That’s just the new reality in the US, too.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Richard Stallman's Controversial Views Are Nothing New and They Distract From Bill Gates' Vastly Worse Role

    It's easier to attack Richard Stallman (RMS) using politics (than using his views on software) and media focus on Stallman's personal views on sexuality bears some resemblance to the push against Linus Torvalds, which leans largely on the false perception that he is sexist, rude and intolerant



  2. Links 16/9/2019: Linux 5.3, EasyOS Releases, Media Backlash Against RMS

    Links for the day



  3. Openwashing Report on Open Networking Foundation (ONF): When Open Source Means Collaboration Among Giant Spying Companies

    Massive telecommunications oligopolies (telecoms) are being described as ethical and responsible by means of openwashing; they even have their own front groups for that obscene mischaracterisation and ONF is one of those



  4. 'Open Source' You Cannot Run Without Renting or 'Licensing' Windows From Microsoft

    When so-called ‘open source’ programs strictly require Vista 10 (or similar) to run, how open are they really and does that not redefine the nature of Open Source while betraying everything Free/libre software stands for?



  5. All About Control: Microsoft is Not Open Source But an Open Source Censor/Spy and GitHub/LinkedIn/Skype Are Its Proprietary Censorship/Surveillance Tools

    All the big companies which Microsoft bought in recent years are proprietary software and all of the company’s big products remain proprietary software; all that “Open Source” is to Microsoft is “something to control and censor“



  6. The Sad State of GNU/Linux News Sites

    The ‘media coup’ of corporate giants (that claim to be 'friends') means that history of GNU/Linux is being distorted and lied about; it also explains prevalent lies such as "Microsoft loves Linux" and denial of GNU/Free software



  7. EPO President Along With Bristows, Managing IP and Other Team UPC Boosters Are Lobbying for Software Patents in Clear and Direct Violation of the EPC

    A calm interpretation of the latest wave of lobbying from litigation professionals, i.e. people who profit when there are lots of patent disputes and even expensive lawsuits which may be totally frivolous (for example, based upon fake patents that aren't EPC-compliant)



  8. Links 15/9/2019: Radeon ROCm 2.7.2, KDE Frameworks 5.62.0, PineTime and Bison 3.4.2

    Links for the day



  9. Illegal/Invalid Patents (IPs) Have Become the 'Norm' in Europe

    Normalisation of invalid patents (granted by the EPO in defiance of the EPC) is a serious problem, but patent law firms continue to exploit that while this whole 'patent bubble' lasts (apparently the number of applications will continue to decrease because the perceived value of European Patents diminishes)



  10. Patent Maximalists, Orbiting the European Patent Office, Work to 'Globalise' a System of Monopolies on Everything

    Monopolies on just about everything are being granted in defiance of the EPC and there are those looking to make this violation ‘unitary’, even worldwide if not just EU-wide



  11. Unitary Patent (UPC) Promotion by Team Battistelli 'Metastasising' in Private Law Firms

    The EPO's Albert Keyack (Team Battistelli) is now in Team UPC as Vice President of Kilburn & Strode LLP; he already fills the media with lies about the UPC, as one can expect



  12. Microsoft Targets GNU/Linux Advocates With Phony Charm Offensives and Fake 'Love'

    The ways Microsoft depresses GNU/Linux advocacy and discourages enthusiasm for Software Freedom is not hard to see; it's worth considering and understanding some of these tactics (mostly assimilation-centric and love-themed), which can otherwise go unnoticed



  13. Proprietary Software Giants Tell Open Source 'Communities' That Proprietary Software Giants Are 'Friends'

    The openwashing services of the so-called 'Linux' Foundation are working; companies that are inherently against Open Source are being called "Open" and some people are willing to swallow this bait (so-called 'compromise' which is actually surrender to proprietary software regimes)



  14. Microsoft Pays the Linux Foundation for Academy Software Foundation, Which the Linux Foundation is Outsourcing to Microsoft

    Microsoft has just bought some more seats and more control over Free/Open Source software; all it had to do was shell out some 'slush funds'



  15. Links 14/9/2019: SUSE CaaS Platform, Huawei Laptops With GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  16. Links 13/9/2019: Catfish 1.4.10, GNOME Firmware 3.34.0 Release

    Links for the day



  17. Links 12/9/2019: GNU/Linux at Huawei, GNOME 3.34 Released

    Links for the day



  18. Links 12/9/2019: Manjaro 18.1 and KaOS 2019.09 Releases

    Links for the day



  19. EPO: Give Us Low-Quality Patent Applications, Patent Trolls Have Use for Those

    What good is the EPC when the EPO feels free to ignore it and nobody holds the EPO accountable for it? At the moment we're living in a post-EPC Europe where the only thing that counts is co-called 'products' (i.e. quantity, not quality).



  20. Coverage for Sponsors: What the Linux Foundation Does is Indistinguishable From Marketing Agencies' Functions

    The marketing agency that controls the name "Linux" is hardly showing any interest in technology or in journalism; it's just buying media coverage for sponsors and this is what it boils down to for the most part (at great expense)



  21. Watch Out, Linus Torvalds: Microsoft Bought Tons of Git Repositories and Now It Goes After Linux

    Microsoft reminds us how E.E.E. tactics work; Microsoft is just hijacking its competition and misleading the market (claiming the competition to be its own, having "extended" it Microsoft's way with proprietary code)



  22. Links 11/9/2019: Acer in LVFS, RawTherapee 5.7 and Qt 5.12.5 Released

    Links for the day



  23. Linux Foundation Inc. Buys Press About Itself and Media Coverage for Sponsors

    Sponsoring so-called ‘news’ sites is bad enough; it is even worse when such media then covers you and your sponsors, such as Snyk (a Linux Foundation sponsor/member, fancier word for client)



  24. Links 11/9/2019: Django 3.0 Alpha, Sunsetting Python 2

    Links for the day



  25. Web Site Called Linux.com Still Exists Only or Mostly to Promote Anti-Linux Firms and Openwashing

    As the Linux Foundation transitions into the Public Relations (PR) industry/domain we should accept if not expect Linux.com to become an extension of PR business models; the old Linux.com is long gone (all staff fired)



  26. Links 10/9/2019: Krita 4.2.6, Ubuntu 19.10 to Boot Faster

    Links for the day



  27. What the Linux Foundation's Jim Zemlin Really Thinks of Desktop/Laptop GNU/Linux

    Interesting words from Ken Starks resonate well with what we nowadays see in the so-called 'Linux' Foundation, whose dedication to Linux is like that of a circus to a monkeys' sideshow



  28. Links 10/9/2019: Kate Planning and GnuCash 3.7

    Links for the day



  29. The Sad Truth That Linux Foundation Staff is Against GPL/Copyleft and Sometimes Against Linux (Unless It's Run Under Vista 10)

    The Linux Foundation works for whoever pays the Linux Foundation and sadly that usually means companies that aren’t dedicated to Linux, to Software Freedom or even to simple truths and to the Rule of Law



  30. Microsoft Uses the Word “Linux” to Promote Privacy-Infringing Proprietary Software and Spread FUD

    The discussion about “Linux” is being saturated if not replaced by misinformation and marketing of Linux’s competition — owing largely to googlebombing tactics that the Linux Foundation participates in rather than tackle


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts