Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On Nov. 9, 2009, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in In re Bilski, 08-964 ' a case that will likely impact whether business methods are eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. ' 101. To date, the Supreme Court has held that abstract ideas, natural phenomena, and laws of nature are not patent eligible, but has yet to apply that holding to a business method. The particular business method at issue in Bilski is a method for hedging commodities risk. Regardless of whether Bilski's particular hedging method is patent eligible, the critical issue is “the test” that the Supreme Court will apply in deciding that issue.
The Supreme Court may also provide guidance as to whether the test it adopts should be applied to other methods and processes, such as medical diagnostic tests and computer software. The possibility of a broader holding has raised concerns in a wide array of industries other than financial services, as evidenced by the 67 amicus briefs that were submitted.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.