ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Case law"
(→Case law on subject matter: ==Case law around the world== ===Canada=== * Amazon v. Commissioner for Patents (2010, Canada) ===England and Wales=== :''See: Case law in the UK'' ===Ger) |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Examples of useful rulings include [[Aerotel v. Telco (2006, UK)]], and [[in re Bilski (2008, USA)]]. | Examples of useful rulings include [[Aerotel v. Telco (2006, UK)]], and [[in re Bilski (2008, USA)]]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Case law around the world== | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Canada=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [[Amazon v. Commissioner for Patents (2010, Canada)]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===England and Wales=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | :''See: [[Case law in the UK]]'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Germany=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | :''See: [[Case law in Germany]]'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===United States of America=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | :''See: [[Case law in the USA]]'' | ||
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== | ==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== |
Revision as of 13:13, 3 November 2010
Case law is only really of interest to us if it's based on "patentable subject matter" - what categories of ideas can or cannot be patented.
Contents
Case law on subject matter
There are many criteria on which a court can rule a patent to be invalid. A court might say the patent wasn't original enough, or wasn't sufficiently innovative. Those court rulings are not very interesting for our goal of excluding software from patentability. An example is the ruling in Germany which invalidated Microsoft's Fat32 patent.[reference needed]
Examples of useful rulings include Aerotel v. Telco (2006, UK), and in re Bilski (2008, USA).
Case law around the world
Canada
England and Wales
- See: Case law in the UK
Germany
- See: Case law in Germany
United States of America
- See: Case law in the USA
Related pages on ESP Wiki
- Category:Case law by region
- Case law in Germany
- Case law in the UK
- Case law in the USA
- How to read patents
- Patent governance