Business Method Patent Proliferation: Convergence of Transactional Analytics and Technical Scientifics
Section 101 of the patent law permits four, somewhat overlapping, yet broad categories of patentable inventions: 1. process, 2. machine, 3. articles of manufacture, and 4. composition of matter. Traditionally, business methods have not been patentable. Many in the patent bar have assumed that patent...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Business Lawyer 2000-11, Vol.56 (1), p.423-458 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 458 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 423 |
container_title | The Business Lawyer |
container_volume | 56 |
creator | Bagby, John W. |
description | Section 101 of the patent law permits four, somewhat overlapping, yet broad categories of patentable inventions: 1. process, 2. machine, 3. articles of manufacture, and 4. composition of matter. Traditionally, business methods have not been patentable. Many in the patent bar have assumed that patent application claims describing methods of doing business (MoDB) are not "directed toward statutor(ily permissible) subject matter." MoDB claims are, however, more appropriately rejected under current law as unpatentable for lack of novelty and/or as obvious. There are additional issues of institutional and public policy that should be examined in the emerging debate over MoDB. These issues include: 1. the scope of MoDB patents, 2. the rigors of MoDB patent prosecution and infringement litigation, 3. development of a useful definition for MoDB, and 4. maintenance of a useful balance between the innovation incentives produced by strong intellectual property rights versus society's need for a replete public domain. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_reports_228494482</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A69372714</galeid><jstor_id>40687983</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A69372714</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g303t-8ddf9f47c264477b71fbc0b9832406dde3c05435ab09a896e47669c77e17606f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkFtLAzEQhRdRsFZ_ghB9diGbpLn4Vos3qFiwPi9pdtKmbJOapEL_vZH64EMZmGHO-Rg4c1INSMNZ3UgqT6sBxljUXCp1Xl2ktC5rQyQdVPZhl5yHlNAb5FXo0Exn8BnNYuidhaizC_4eTYL_hrgEbwAFi-ZR-6TNr6d7NC5tn51JSPsOzcGsvDNF_zCunHK2OJfVmdV9gqu_Oaw-nx7nk5d6-v78OhlP6yXFNNey66yyTBjCGRNiIRq7MHihJCUM864DavCI0ZFeYKWl4sAE58oIAY3gmFs6rG4Od7cxfO0g5TbCNsScWkIkU4xJUpjbA7PUPbTO25CjNhuXTDvmigoiGlaguyNQeUB5SR88WFfk_3h9BC_VwcaZY_z1gV-nHGK7jW6j474tIaUoaekPPEGHbA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>228494482</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Business Method Patent Proliferation: Convergence of Transactional Analytics and Technical Scientifics</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Bagby, John W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bagby, John W.</creatorcontrib><description>Section 101 of the patent law permits four, somewhat overlapping, yet broad categories of patentable inventions: 1. process, 2. machine, 3. articles of manufacture, and 4. composition of matter. Traditionally, business methods have not been patentable. Many in the patent bar have assumed that patent application claims describing methods of doing business (MoDB) are not "directed toward statutor(ily permissible) subject matter." MoDB claims are, however, more appropriately rejected under current law as unpatentable for lack of novelty and/or as obvious. There are additional issues of institutional and public policy that should be examined in the emerging debate over MoDB. These issues include: 1. the scope of MoDB patents, 2. the rigors of MoDB patent prosecution and infringement litigation, 3. development of a useful definition for MoDB, and 4. maintenance of a useful balance between the innovation incentives produced by strong intellectual property rights versus society's need for a replete public domain.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-6899</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2164-1838</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chicago: Section of Business Law of the American Bar Association</publisher><subject>Business ; Business models ; Commercial law ; Computer software ; Federal court decisions ; Federal legislation ; Intellectual property ; Internet ; Interpretation and construction ; Inventions ; Management information systems ; Novelty ; Patent infringement ; Patent law ; Prior art ; State court decisions ; SURVEYS</subject><ispartof>The Business Lawyer, 2000-11, Vol.56 (1), p.423-458</ispartof><rights>2000 American Bar Association</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2000 American Bar Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Bar Association, Section of Business Law Nov 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40687983$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40687983$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>312,314,780,784,791,803,58016,58249</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bagby, John W.</creatorcontrib><title>Business Method Patent Proliferation: Convergence of Transactional Analytics and Technical Scientifics</title><title>The Business Lawyer</title><description>Section 101 of the patent law permits four, somewhat overlapping, yet broad categories of patentable inventions: 1. process, 2. machine, 3. articles of manufacture, and 4. composition of matter. Traditionally, business methods have not been patentable. Many in the patent bar have assumed that patent application claims describing methods of doing business (MoDB) are not "directed toward statutor(ily permissible) subject matter." MoDB claims are, however, more appropriately rejected under current law as unpatentable for lack of novelty and/or as obvious. There are additional issues of institutional and public policy that should be examined in the emerging debate over MoDB. These issues include: 1. the scope of MoDB patents, 2. the rigors of MoDB patent prosecution and infringement litigation, 3. development of a useful definition for MoDB, and 4. maintenance of a useful balance between the innovation incentives produced by strong intellectual property rights versus society's need for a replete public domain.</description><subject>Business</subject><subject>Business models</subject><subject>Commercial law</subject><subject>Computer software</subject><subject>Federal court decisions</subject><subject>Federal legislation</subject><subject>Intellectual property</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Interpretation and construction</subject><subject>Inventions</subject><subject>Management information systems</subject><subject>Novelty</subject><subject>Patent infringement</subject><subject>Patent law</subject><subject>Prior art</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>SURVEYS</subject><issn>0007-6899</issn><issn>2164-1838</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkFtLAzEQhRdRsFZ_ghB9diGbpLn4Vos3qFiwPi9pdtKmbJOapEL_vZH64EMZmGHO-Rg4c1INSMNZ3UgqT6sBxljUXCp1Xl2ktC5rQyQdVPZhl5yHlNAb5FXo0Exn8BnNYuidhaizC_4eTYL_hrgEbwAFi-ZR-6TNr6d7NC5tn51JSPsOzcGsvDNF_zCunHK2OJfVmdV9gqu_Oaw-nx7nk5d6-v78OhlP6yXFNNey66yyTBjCGRNiIRq7MHihJCUM864DavCI0ZFeYKWl4sAE58oIAY3gmFs6rG4Od7cxfO0g5TbCNsScWkIkU4xJUpjbA7PUPbTO25CjNhuXTDvmigoiGlaguyNQeUB5SR88WFfk_3h9BC_VwcaZY_z1gV-nHGK7jW6j474tIaUoaekPPEGHbA</recordid><startdate>20001101</startdate><enddate>20001101</enddate><creator>Bagby, John W.</creator><general>Section of Business Law of the American Bar Association</general><general>American Bar Association</general><scope>ILT</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20001101</creationdate><title>Business Method Patent Proliferation: Convergence of Transactional Analytics and Technical Scientifics</title><author>Bagby, John W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g303t-8ddf9f47c264477b71fbc0b9832406dde3c05435ab09a896e47669c77e17606f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Business</topic><topic>Business models</topic><topic>Commercial law</topic><topic>Computer software</topic><topic>Federal court decisions</topic><topic>Federal legislation</topic><topic>Intellectual property</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Interpretation and construction</topic><topic>Inventions</topic><topic>Management information systems</topic><topic>Novelty</topic><topic>Patent infringement</topic><topic>Patent law</topic><topic>Prior art</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>SURVEYS</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bagby, John W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>The Business Lawyer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bagby, John W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Business Method Patent Proliferation: Convergence of Transactional Analytics and Technical Scientifics</atitle><jtitle>The Business Lawyer</jtitle><date>2000-11-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>423</spage><epage>458</epage><pages>423-458</pages><issn>0007-6899</issn><eissn>2164-1838</eissn><abstract>Section 101 of the patent law permits four, somewhat overlapping, yet broad categories of patentable inventions: 1. process, 2. machine, 3. articles of manufacture, and 4. composition of matter. Traditionally, business methods have not been patentable. Many in the patent bar have assumed that patent application claims describing methods of doing business (MoDB) are not "directed toward statutor(ily permissible) subject matter." MoDB claims are, however, more appropriately rejected under current law as unpatentable for lack of novelty and/or as obvious. There are additional issues of institutional and public policy that should be examined in the emerging debate over MoDB. These issues include: 1. the scope of MoDB patents, 2. the rigors of MoDB patent prosecution and infringement litigation, 3. development of a useful definition for MoDB, and 4. maintenance of a useful balance between the innovation incentives produced by strong intellectual property rights versus society's need for a replete public domain.</abstract><cop>Chicago</cop><pub>Section of Business Law of the American Bar Association</pub><tpages>36</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-6899 |
ispartof | The Business Lawyer, 2000-11, Vol.56 (1), p.423-458 |
issn | 0007-6899 2164-1838 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_reports_228494482 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
subjects | Business Business models Commercial law Computer software Federal court decisions Federal legislation Intellectual property Internet Interpretation and construction Inventions Management information systems Novelty Patent infringement Patent law Prior art State court decisions SURVEYS |
title | Business Method Patent Proliferation: Convergence of Transactional Analytics and Technical Scientifics |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T01%3A37%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Business%20Method%20Patent%20Proliferation:%20Convergence%20of%20Transactional%20Analytics%20and%20Technical%20Scientifics&rft.jtitle=The%20Business%20Lawyer&rft.au=Bagby,%20John%20W.&rft.date=2000-11-01&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=423&rft.epage=458&rft.pages=423-458&rft.issn=0007-6899&rft.eissn=2164-1838&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA69372714%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=228494482&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A69372714&rft_jstor_id=40687983&rfr_iscdi=true |