美国商业方法专利适格性审查的新发展  

New Development of American Business Method Patent Eligibility Review

作　　者：王晓燕[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学法学院,上海200240

出　　处：《重庆邮电大学学报（社会科学版）》2015年第4期27-33,共7页Journal of Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目:云计算知识产权问题研究(12YJAZH116);上海交通大学文理交叉专项基金重点项目:云计算知识产权问题研究(11JCZ04);赢创德固赛(中国)投资有限公司设立的赢创知识产权研究基金

摘　　要：Bilski案否定了对商业方法专利的全类别排除,并拒绝将"机器或转变测试法"作为判断"何谓方法"的唯一测试法,显现出专利适格性问题上"明线规则"的弱化,有利于对发明实质的关注,避免被不当规避,同时对新技术的发展更具包容性。Bilski案后,CAFC通过系列商业方法专利适格性判例阐释了禁止"先占抽象概念"的标准:"完全由人的思维执行的方法"属于不可专利的抽象概念;未对抽象概念进行"有意义的限制"不可专利;"抽象概念的实际应用"属于专利适格标的;商业方法实施"装置"、"系统"发明同样可能属于"抽象概念"等。这些更灵活务实的适格性审查规则,以及旨在提高商业方法专利质量的各项行政程序的实施,将令商业方法专利呈现更积极有序的前景。The Supreme Court has rejected calls for a categorical exclusion of so-called business method claims and has held that the formulaic ＂machine-or-transformation＂test cannot be the exclusive means for determining the patent eligibility of process claims. The weakening of bright-line rules is in favor of concerns about the essence of the invention,to avoid being improperly circumvent,and to be more inclusive for new technologies. After the Bilski case,CAFC illustrates the prohibition against patents for ＂abstract idea＂through a series of business method patent eligibility case,for example,＂the method is fully executed by the human mind＂is not a patent-eligible application; a patent-eligible claim must include one or more substantive limitations; the practical application of abstract concepts is patent eligible subject matter; business method device and system may also be abstractive. These flexible,pragmatic approaches and administrative programs aimed to improve the quality of business method patents will make a more positive outlook.

关 键 词：商业方法 专利适格性 明线规则 Bilski案 

分 类 号：D912.8[政治法律—军事法学]