2010年的第二篇文章選自于08年2月26號的《經(jīng)濟周刊》
鏈接:http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_09/b4073068471067.htm。
第二篇文章有關(guān)法律學,談到了支付方式的專利權(quán),專利權(quán)受到威脅以及專利權(quán)申請的法律重重障礙。
原文如下(加粗部分為真題節(jié)選部分):
A Pending Threat to Patents
A case before an appeals court could make it harder to win legal protection for business methods by Michael Orey
Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com (AMZN) received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch (MER) got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears poised to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 15 said it would use a case pending before it to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D. Crouch, a patent professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
EXPLOSION IN FILINGS
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that ushered in such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank (STT) case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by nascent Internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their portfolios, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM (IBM) noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment firms armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the Supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
· | 2022考研復試聯(lián)系導師有哪些注意事 | 04-28 |
· | 2022考研復試面試常見問題 | 04-28 |
· | 2022年考研復試面試回答提問方法有 | 04-28 |
· | 2022考研復試怎么緩解緩解焦慮心態(tài) | 04-27 |
· | 2022年考研復試的訣竅介紹 | 04-27 |
· | 2022年考研復試英語如何準備 | 04-26 |
· | 2022年考研復試英語口語常見句式 | 04-26 |
· | 2022年考研復試的四個細節(jié) | 04-26 |
· | 2022考研復試準備:與導師及時交流 | 04-26 |
· | 2022考研復試面試的綜合技巧 | 04-26 |