earticle

영어

In recent we have been concerned about Business Method Patent, that is, whether computer software is proper subject matter for patentability. In the United States, the recent State Street Bank v. Signature Financial decision appears to have put an end to the question. The decision repudiated two judicially created patent subject matter exceptions: the mathematical algorithm and the business method exceptions. Perhaps the court recognized the problem it had created where the manner in which a software invention is claimed determined patentability. Perhaps the court finally realized the distinction between mathematical formula and mathematical algorithms that had been lost on the court in previous decisions. Any computerrelated process or machine is patentable subject matter so long as it is applied to a practical purpose. Any invention, whether or not it contains a mathematical algorithm, could not represent a mere abstract idea if the invention had a practical and useful application. The question of whether a claim encompasses statutory subject matter should not focus on which of the four categories of subject matter a claim is directed to -process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter -but rather on the essential characteristics of the subject matter, in particular, its practical utility. The European community has been dealing with the problem of software patentability for as long as the United States. In the early eighties, a new European patent act was passed that specifically rejected patent coverage for software. But in 1999, the EPO Board of Appeals ruled that claims drawn to software, either on a medium or by itself might be allowed by the EPO so long as the claimed invention has a "technical effect." They have apparently recognized the value and need of software patents to protect the industry against infringement. The Japanese Patent Law does not explicitly exclude computer programs from statutory subject matter. In order to be statutory subject matter, a computer program must show that it uses the physical laws of nature and is not simply the expression of an idea or of a logical process. The standard requires a close connection between software and the hardware of a computer. In practice, however, the Japanese Patent Office has liberally accepted all kinds of computer-related inventions, along the same lines as the U.S. Patent Office. Simply stated, any invention that is claimed in the form of a process, a machine, a composition of matter, or an article of manufacture is patentable so long as it has practical utility. Software is to be treated no differently than any other claimed invention. Perhaps now we can move on the other problems in Business Method Patent. The actually issues of software patentability such as considerations of non-obviousness.