And another win for the good guys

[jducoeur]

More importantly to some of us, here's another TechCrunch article -- apparently, the DC Court of Appeals has just invalidated a broad swathe of business-process patents.

For those who haven't been following along, business-process patents are one of the biggest tech controversies of the past decade: they basically allow you to patent very vague concepts that are (IMO) a horrible abuse of the patent process. They're gradually dragging down the software industry, because there are so many of these patents that it is becoming increasingly difficult to write *anything* without tripping over somebody's patent by accident. There's an entire irritating sub-industry of companies that do nothing but buy old dead patents and go looking for people who violated them accidentally, who they can then sue.

I haven't read through the details yet, and I suspect that this isn't going to solve anything like the whole problem. But any step that chips away at the patent morass is probably a good step in my book...

ETA: See Ars Technica for a bit more information. It sounds like the tide is really beginning to turn -- the court officially discounted one of its previous pro-patent decisions.

Comments

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending) I think it calls into question large classes of software patents, as well.

[jducoeur]

That definitely qualified as "fortunately" in my book. While I've gotten some benefit from software patents, IMO they cause much more damage than good to the industry.

The only real downside I see is that small companies may have to start getting their investments based on their business plans rather than their patent portfolios. I can live with that, though...

[metageek.livejournal.com]

Not directly. According to Groklaw, some of the amici filings asked them to include software patents, but the court declined, since the case wasn't about a software patent.

They did acknowledge that their reasoning might apply to software, but we'll have to wait for another case.

[jducoeur]

True, but it's a good sign. Software patents aren't invalidated yet, but the wind seems to be blowing in that direction...

Minor quible

[osewalrus.livejournal.com]

Not the D.C. Court of Appeals. It is the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which is a special court handling very specialized appeals, including patent appeals. It is, however, a very big deal, because they are the leading authority on patent claims. the recent reversals by the Surpemes must have begun taking hold.

Re: Minor quible

[jducoeur]

Sorry -- hadn't even occurred to me that "the Circuit Court of Appeals in DC" (which is how I'd seen it referred to) was different from "DC Court of Appeals". However, what you say just makes me happier: I hadn't realized that this court had particular jurisdiction over the subject...

Re: Minor quible

[osewalrus.livejournal.com]

Actually, to make things more interesting, there are three distinct courts:

The D.C. Court of Appeals is the highest court for the District of Columbia. If DC were a state, it would be the state supreme court. It is also the court for which I clerked.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is what everyone thinks of as the DC Court of Appeals. It is important because, in addition to reviewing opinions of the Federal District Courts in the circuit, it is the court of general jurisdiction over most federal agencies (most agency decisions are appealable either to the D.C. Cir. or the United States Court of Appeals for the district in which petitioner resides or has its principle place of business).

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which is based in D.C., has jurisdiction in appeals of a set of claims over which federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

[cellio]

Excellent.