Sign In

Communications of the ACM

Legally speaking

Only Technological Processes Are Patentable

Pamela Samuelson in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building

Pamela Samuelson holding the Bilski brief in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building.

Courtesy of Pamela Samuelson

The U.S. Supreme Court will narrow the universe of process innovations that can be patented to those that are "technological," but what will that mean for software?

The full text of this article is premium content


Apperson Johnson

What is claimed:

A method for causing a physical transformation with a concrete result in the brain of a Supreme Court Justice consisting of:
(a) a sentence that informs the justice that all mental activities have concrete, tangible results;
(b) a series of FMRI images that provide evidence for the said sentence;
(c) at least one electro-physiological brain assay comparing SCJ before and after reading this claim;
wherein the said SCJ comes to their senses just in time to support useful innovative arts, regardless of the physical manifestation of said arts

Displaying 1 comment

Log in to Read the Full Article

Sign In

Sign in using your ACM Web Account username and password to access premium content if you are an ACM member, Communications subscriber or Digital Library subscriber.

Need Access?

Please select one of the options below for access to premium content and features.

Create a Web Account

If you are already an ACM member, Communications subscriber, or Digital Library subscriber, please set up a web account to access premium content on this site.

Join the ACM

Become a member to take full advantage of ACM's outstanding computing information resources, networking opportunities, and other benefits.

Subscribe to Communications of the ACM Magazine

Get full access to 50+ years of CACM content and receive the print version of the magazine monthly.

Purchase the Article

Non-members can purchase this article or a copy of the magazine in which it appears.