[A2k] "Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (Gibus): Re: US Federal Circuit to Consider Software Patentability

Manon Ress manon.ress at keionline.org
Tue Oct 9 16:32:04 PDT 2012

Note the a2k List does not accept attachment
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "\"Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (Gibus)\"" <gibus at april.org>
To: a2k at lists.keionline.org
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2012 21:46:05 +0200
Subject: Re: [A2k] US Federal Circuit to Consider Software Patentability
Le 09/10/2012 19:41, Seth Johnson a écrit :
> Yeah!  So can we get an amicus filing that explains that the test of
> patentability of the software is the presence of a logic processor?

For this, there was already a good amicus brief by Timothy B. and Lee
and others from Cato Institute, thats was filed for Prometheus vs Mayo:
Prometheus vs. Mayo was not actually the good case to argue about
swpats, but the same arguments perfectly fits in CLS Bank.

Also good arguments about the "logic processor" in various post by
"PolR" on groklaw:
although his arguments are to be reworded to a more legal style of
amicus briefs.

And of course amici filed for Bilsky can be a source of inspiration
(although I haven't read all of them and wasn't really convinced by
SFLC's one).

Note also that this is not US Supreme Court, but CAFC, which, as it has
been underlined in the past weeks, is not really likely to waive its
pro-patent bias. But who knows? They've already done so in Bilsky.

PS: about Erik's post on this list yesterday on " NYT: patents as
swords" and regular expressions, I don't feel this is the good time in
US to argument around prior art. There seems to be a momentum to go
further and be firm about a clear and full exclusion of software from
patentability. Don't waste this momentum with prior art arguments.
Gérald Sédrati-Dinet
http://www.unitary-patent.eu/      http://www.april.org/
http://www.brevet-unitaire.eu/     http://laquadrature.net/

More information about the A2k mailing list