Google

From en.swpat.org

Jump to: navigation, search
Making the case:
swpat.org is a publicly editable wiki. Get involved!
Google's position on software patents is unclear.

In the brief they submitted to the US Supreme Court for the 2009 Bilski case, they argued against software patents.

(They support the Patent Reform Act in the USA, but this act does not propose excluding software from patentability, so it's of little interest.)

Contents

[edit] Stockpiling software patents

Google has applied for, and has been granted, a large number of software patents.

(HELP: have they ever used them aggressively?)

(HELP: When did they start getting patents? Dan Ravicher says in his 2007 presentation 1h03:00 that people invested in Google before Google had patents)

[edit] Bilski v. Kappos brief excerpts

For the 2009 Bilski v. Kappos case in the US Supreme Court, Google co-submitted a brief along with six banking institutions: 08-964_RespondentAmCu7FinancialCorps.pdf

[edit] Interest Of Amici Curiae

"Patents on methods of doing business and abstract software processes significantly affect the financial services and information technology industries because, rather than encouraging innovation, they monopolize the very mental processes and ideas that are the building blocks of innovation."


[edit] Summary Of Argument

"Distilled to its essence, petitioners’ patent application claims nothing more than the idea of hedging against the weather."


"That process is no less an abstract idea—and no more patentable—than one comprising the familiar morning ritual of consulting the newspaper to determine the weather forecast, mentally identifying whether an umbrella or sunglasses would best hedge against the risk of weather-related discomfort, and performing the post-solution step of carrying the chosen accessory to work."


"[...] this Court has long asked whether the claimed process results in a physical transformation or is necessarily tied to a particular machine or apparatus in a non-conventional way. The conventional use of a machine or conventional post-solution activity is not sufficient to render an otherwise unpatentable idea patent-eligible."


"As amici can well attest, the recent surge in patents on abstract ideas such as how to run a business or software that merely implements such methods has not promoted innovation in the financial services or information technology fields—to the contrary, such patents create a drag on innovation." (NOTE: this doesn't argue against software patents in general, only against software to implement a business method)


"Studies of lawsuits involving business and software patents held by small entities have suggested that “the primary role played by them is the collecting of royalties from other firms.” Hall, at 13."


"This experience confirms the wisdom of settled precedent, under which these kinds of business methods and software are not patent-eligible. Expanding the interpretation of “process” in Section 101, as petitioners urge the Court to do, would only serve to aggravate these drags on innovation and would thus contravene the core purpose of the Patent Act."

[edit] The PageRank algorithm

(This section doesn't have a point yet. It's just gathering data for later research.)

[edit] Related pages on en.swpat.org

  • Apple v. HTC (2010, USA) - although Google is not a party, they have an interest because some of the claimed infringements seem to involve Google's Android software

[edit] External links


This wiki is part of the End Software Patents campaign (donate). For more information, see:
Retrieved from "http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Google"
Personal tools