USA / Patents / Software

In the Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol 15 No 1, 2000, Cathy E Cretsinger discusses the effects of the Federal Circuit’s judgment in AT & T Corp v Excel Communications Inc (1999). In the author’s view, the judgment puts an end to the apparent dichotomy in the US Courts’ treatment of patent claims involving computer software. The dichotomy lies in the Supreme Court’s decisions that patent claiming processes involving mathematical algorithms must incorporate a significant, "if ill-defined", physical component; and the Federal Circuit’s decisions regarding machine claims drafted in means-plus-function format as patentable subject-matter, provided that the inventor disclosed some supporting structure.

The Supreme Court’s decisions were intended to prevent the patenting of mere ideas or thought processes. The Federal Court’s decision in the AT & T case, described in detail in this article, allows computer-related processes to be patented without regard for physical limitations or elements. However, the author concludes that other provisions of the statute law – she cites the step-plus-function language of 35 USC § 112 ¶ 6 – provides courts "with a potentially powerful tool for keeping software patents within reasonable limits". [20012]