en.swpat.org is a wiki.   You can edit it.   May contain statements End Software Patents does not endorse.

November 2014: About Microsoft’s patent licence for .NET core

SitemapCountriesWhy abolish?Law proposalsStudiesCase lawPatent office case lawLawsuits

ATT v. Excel ruling by US CAFC on 14 April 1999

From en.swpat.org
Revision as of 11:47, 2 August 2012 by Ciaran (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications Inc.

Cited in ESP's brief for Bilski v. Kappos (2009, USA) as "172 F.3d 1352, 1356-59 (Fed. Cir. 1999)".

This ruling is one of three which Ben Klemens argues wrongly applied the Diehr ruling by using the "as a whole" test without using the "significant post-solution activity" or "transformation" tests.

Thus, the Alappat inquiry simply requires an examination of the contested claims to see if the claimed subject matter as a whole is a disembodied mathematical concept representing nothing more than a "law of nature" or an "abstract idea," or if the mathematical concept has been reduced to some practical application rendering it "useful."

[edit] Related pages on en.swpat.org

[edit] External links

This wiki is part of the End Software Patents (ESP) campaign (donate). For more information, see:
>> endsoftwarepatents.org (Main ESP website) <<
>> endsoftwarepatents.org/news (News) <<

This wiki is publicly editable. (See: en.swpat.org:About) It's a pool of information, not a statement of ESP's views or policies, so no permission is required. Add your knowledge! (See: Help:How to make a good contribution)