

Score Two Wins Against Software Patents - petewarden
http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2009/12/score-two-wins-against-software-patents.html

======
decode
It's worth noting that the 3D Graphics patent was deemed invalid based on the
"machine or transformation" test given by the Federal Circuit Court in the
Bilski decision. This decision has been appealed to the Supreme Court, who
will rule on it next year. The prevailing opinion is that they will make some
modifications to the Bilski ruling, since the Supreme Court rarely takes cases
and just rubber-stamps the previous rulings.

So, depending on how the Supreme Court ruling on Bilski comes out, the
software patent landscape could change significantly in the upcoming months,
or stay largely the same.

~~~
petewarden
Brad actually attended the oral arguments for the Bilski case at the Supreme
Court:

[http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2009/11/my-field-trip-to-
the...](http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2009/11/my-field-trip-to-the-supreme-
court.html)

I'll be very interested in the outcome of that too.

------
mfr
I'm just glad that the court explicitly said that "nonpracticing patent
owners" are distinct from those who would benefit from the use of the patent
in manufacturing.

Stating that _“we observe that Acceleron is solely a licensing entity, and
without enforcement it receives no benefits from its patents.[...]"_ is a very
interesting retort to the standard argument for IP holding companies, that
being "A patent is a patent, and it doesn't matter whether the owner is going
to use it to produce an item or not."

