The AIPLA has proposed a new Section 101:<\/p>\n
35 U.S.C. \u00a7 101\u2014Inventions Patentable<\/p>\n
(a) Eligible Subject Matter.\u2014Whoever invents or discovers any useful process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or any useful improvement thereof, shall be entitled to a patent therefor, subject only to the conditions and requirements set forth in this title.<\/p>\n
(b) Sole Exceptions to Subject Matter Eligibility.\u2014A claimed invention is ineligible under subsection (a) only if the claimed invention as a whole exists in nature independent of and prior to any human activity, or can be performed solely in the human mind.<\/p>\n
(c) Sole Eligibility Standard.\u2014The eligibility of a claimed invention under subsections (a) and (b) shall be determined without regard to the requirements or conditions of sections 102, 103, and 112 of this title, the manner in which the claimed invention was made or discovered, or whether the claimed invention includes an inventive concept.<\/p>\n
This proposed version of 101 would eliminate the “abstract idea” exception created by the Supreme Court, and which the courts have been unwilling (and unable) to properly define, and which has denied protection to inventors or novel and useful computer related inventions.<\/p>\n
It is about time that the patent bar solved the patentability problem it created. \u00a0Hopefully this proposal or something similar will end the \u00a0tyranny that is the Alice v. CLS.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The AIPLA has proposed a new Section 101: 35 U.S.C. \u00a7 101\u2014Inventions Patentable (a) Eligible Subject Matter.\u2014Whoever invents or discovers any useful process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or any useful improvement thereof, shall be entitled to a patent therefor, … Continue reading