eecs 690 patents and software 23 february 2011. patents must be applied for in order to be...

9
EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011

Upload: richard-bates

Post on 26-Mar-2015

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

EECS 690

Patents and Software

23 February 2011

Page 2: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

Patents

• Must be applied for• In order to be patentable, a device or process

must be:– New– Useful– Non-Obvious (to those having ordinary skill in the

relevant area of technology)• Things traditionally excluded from patent:

– Laws of nature– Physical phenomena– Abstract ideas (including mathematical equations,

theorems, formulae, algorithms)

Page 3: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

Patent protection vs. copyright

• An invention described in great written detail can be copyrighted, but anyone may legally follow the description to produce the invention and even sell it.

• Patents can by licensed by others for a fee to produce the invention, and can be reverse-engineered from the patent in order to make useful improvements.

• Most software is copyright protected, not patent protected.

Page 4: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

Diamond vs. Diehr (1981)

• Involved patenting a procedure for molding uncured synthetic rubber into rubber products through the use of a computer program that controlled the curing temperature and time of rubber in a mold.

• Since Diamond v Diehr, the number of software patents has grown enormously.

Page 5: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

algorithms

• The line between patentable and non-patentable algorithms is fuzzy

• In general, algorithms that control the operation of (mostly industrial) hardware or that are part of an overall machine invention are patentable.

Page 6: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

controversies

1. When a patent is refused on the grounds that the invention is not new, it must be documented that the invention is not new. As a result, many widespread programming methods obtained patents because the PTO was unable to prove lack of novelty.

Page 7: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

controversies

2. Some claim that patent protection for software is unfair to small and medium-sized programming groups because the costs of searching the patents to avoid infringement, or of being sued for infringement are prohibitive. Also, the largest companies trade patents with each other to buy immunity from infringement lawsuits, and this excludes smaller companies.

Page 8: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

controversies

3. There has been a rush of patents on methods of doing e-business (e.g. Amazon’s “one-click” method). Among proposals to address these concerns are to decrease length of these kinds of patents and allowing some form of public oversight to the patent granting process.

Page 9: EECS 690 Patents and Software 23 February 2011. Patents Must be applied for In order to be patentable, a device or process must be: –New –Useful –Non-Obvious

Patent/Copyright purposes

• Are these sorts of intellectual property protection performing the function that they are intended to perform?

• Is there another way to protect software that satisfies the purposes of protecting intellectual property?