Patents For Software and Genetic Code Could Be Revived By Two Bills In Congress (arstechnica.com)
(Wednesday September 18, 2024 @11:30PM (BeauHD)
from the here-we-go-again dept.)
- Reference: 0175036051
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/24/09/18/2218220/patents-for-software-and-genetic-code-could-be-revived-by-two-bills-in-congress
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/09/software-and-genetic-patents-are-up-for-debate-again-in-congress/
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:
> The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to consider two bills Thursday that would effectively [1]nullify the Supreme Court's rulings against patents on broad software processes and human genes . Open source and Internet freedom advocates are [2]mobilizing and [3]pushing back . The [4]Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (or PERA, S. 2140), sponsored by Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), would amend US Code such that "all judicial exceptions to patent eligibility are eliminated." That would include [5]the 2014 ruling in which the Supreme Court held, with Justice Clarence Thomas writing, that simply performing an existing process on a computer does not make it a new, patentable invention. "The relevant question is whether the claims here do more than simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer," Thomas wrote. "They do not." That case also drew on Bilski v. Kappos, a case in which a patent was proposed based solely on the concept of hedging against price fluctuations in commodity markets. [...]
>
> Another wrinkle in the PERA bill involves genetic patents. The Supreme Court ruled in June 2013 that pieces of DNA that occur naturally in the genomes of humans or other organisms cannot, themselves, be patented. Myriad Genetics had previously been granted patents on genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, which were targeted in a lawsuit led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The resulting Supreme Court decision -- this one also written by Thomas -- found that information that naturally occurs in the human genome could not be the subject to a patent, even if the patent covered the process of isolating that information from the rest of the genome. As with broad software patents, PERA would seemingly allow for the patenting of isolated human genes and connections between those genes and diseases like cancer. [...] The Judiciary Committee is set to debate and potentially amend or rewrite PREVAIL and PERA (i.e. mark up) on Thursday.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/09/software-and-genetic-patents-are-up-for-debate-again-in-congress/
[2] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/09/bill-would-boost-worst-patents-software-and-human-genes
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/18/open_source_orgs_strengthen_alliance/
[4] https://www.tillis.senate.gov/services/files/4B41CBF2-57AB-4E8E-9E93-7D714A7AAB40
[5] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/208/
> The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to consider two bills Thursday that would effectively [1]nullify the Supreme Court's rulings against patents on broad software processes and human genes . Open source and Internet freedom advocates are [2]mobilizing and [3]pushing back . The [4]Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (or PERA, S. 2140), sponsored by Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), would amend US Code such that "all judicial exceptions to patent eligibility are eliminated." That would include [5]the 2014 ruling in which the Supreme Court held, with Justice Clarence Thomas writing, that simply performing an existing process on a computer does not make it a new, patentable invention. "The relevant question is whether the claims here do more than simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer," Thomas wrote. "They do not." That case also drew on Bilski v. Kappos, a case in which a patent was proposed based solely on the concept of hedging against price fluctuations in commodity markets. [...]
>
> Another wrinkle in the PERA bill involves genetic patents. The Supreme Court ruled in June 2013 that pieces of DNA that occur naturally in the genomes of humans or other organisms cannot, themselves, be patented. Myriad Genetics had previously been granted patents on genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, which were targeted in a lawsuit led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The resulting Supreme Court decision -- this one also written by Thomas -- found that information that naturally occurs in the human genome could not be the subject to a patent, even if the patent covered the process of isolating that information from the rest of the genome. As with broad software patents, PERA would seemingly allow for the patenting of isolated human genes and connections between those genes and diseases like cancer. [...] The Judiciary Committee is set to debate and potentially amend or rewrite PREVAIL and PERA (i.e. mark up) on Thursday.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/09/software-and-genetic-patents-are-up-for-debate-again-in-congress/
[2] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/09/bill-would-boost-worst-patents-software-and-human-genes
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/18/open_source_orgs_strengthen_alliance/
[4] https://www.tillis.senate.gov/services/files/4B41CBF2-57AB-4E8E-9E93-7D714A7AAB40
[5] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/208/
I Patent useing the letter "E" on an computer and (Score:2)
I Patent useing the letter "E" on an computer and will charge $0.0002 per use!