24h購物| | PChome| 登入
2015-07-28 14:15:53| 人氣141| 回應0 | 上一篇 | 下一篇

抽象概念的可專利性

推薦 0 收藏 0 轉貼0 訂閱站台

抽象概念不一定需要仰賴transformation method 或 prticular machine來決定是否適格

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

ALICE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. v. CLS BANK INTERNATIONAL ET AL.

(1)We must first determine whether the claims at issue are directed to a patent-ineligible concept.We conclude that they are: These claims are drawn to the abstract idea of intermediated settlement.

At Mayo step two, we must examine the elements of theclaim to determine whether it contains an “‘inventive concept’” sufficient to “transform” the claimed abstract idea into a patent-eligible application. 566 U. S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 3, 11). A claim that recites an abstract idea must include “additional features” to ensure “that the [claim] is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize
the [abstract idea].”
(2)At Mayo step two, we must examine the elements of theclaim to determine whether it contains an “‘inventive concept’” sufficient to “transform” the claimed abstract idea into a patent-eligible application. 566 U. S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 3, 11). A claim that recites an abstract idea must include “additional features” to ensure “that the [claim] is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolizethe [abstract idea].” 

(3)In other words, the claims in Diehr were patent eligible because they improved an existing technological process, not because they were implemented on a computer.

(1)抽象概念+(2)限定於特定領域或環境+(3)更好的效能=專利適格 

台長: 蘿蔔
人氣(141) | 回應(0)| 推薦 (0)| 收藏 (0)| 轉寄
全站分類: 教育學習(進修、留學、學術研究、教育概況) | 個人分類: 心得分享 |
此分類下一篇:Apple v. Samsun 永久禁制令的判斷
此分類上一篇:inertial sensor不足以克服particular machine test?

是 (若未登入"個人新聞台帳號"則看不到回覆唷!)
* 請輸入識別碼:
請輸入圖片中算式的結果(可能為0) 
(有*為必填)
TOP
詳全文