Re: [Patents] myths & lies

[Erik Josefsson <erikjosefsson@telia.com>]

On Sat, 2002-06-15 at 00:02, Jean-Jacques de Jong wrote:
> > Swpat have been granted for quite a long time, and many very broad and
> > ridiculous ones (e.g. hyperlink) are not new.  Yet there has been an
> > explosion in the last few years, especially since the mid nineties.
> 
> Indeed, the State Street decision is a landmark decision for business
> method patents, not software patents.

Ok. The share of US business method patents seems to be growing
exponentially since 1995. Which means there is a status quo gold rush:
http://people.bu.edu/cockburn/cockburn_ifri_bmp_presentation.pdf
(page 6)


but Dreyfuss says on State Street:

before "...software could be patented only if the claims were drawn to a
machine or placed in the context of a larger process (this was the
so-called Freeman-Walter-Abele analysis)." 

"...this decision... greatly increases the business of the PTO"

"... State Street has sent the computer industry and the business world
the message that their patent applications are welcome."
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/drey0309.htm


//Erik