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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Business Lawyer 2000-11, Vol.56 (1), p.423-458
1. Verfasser: Bagby, John W.
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