Supreme Court's Bilski Decision Will Have
Litigants Asking: What Is an "Abstract
Idea?"
By George C. Best and Mary M. Calkins
The U.S. Supreme Court's long-awaited decision in Bilski
v. Kappos, 561 U.S. -- (2010), likely raised more questions
than it answered. The Court's cautious ruling avoided any
dramatic alterations of the patent law landscape, holding that:
business methods may be patented; the
"machine-or-transformation" test is not the sole
test for determining whether a process is directed to patentable
subject matter; and that Mr. Bilski was not entitled to a patent
because his claims were directed to an unpatentable abstract idea.
But beyond those general statements, the Court declined to give
much specific guidance for evaluating future cases. In particular,
litigants and courts may find themselves repeatedly confronting the
question: What, exactly, is an abstract idea?
