Bilski v. Kappos
On Monday the Supreme Court heard one of the largest patent cases in years, Bilski v. Kappos, 08-964. Bilski asks the court to really define what can be patented. Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw came up with a mathematical way of predicting energy costs (which naturally fluctuate based on weather and materials) and sought to patent it. Patents do cover processes, but do they cover a process which does not involve any tools or machinery and does not create anything new? Oral arguments are now complete, and some write ups feel that the Supreme Court did not appear very friendly to the plaintiffs, but only time will tell. What do you think? For more information on the case, take a look at the SCOTUSWiki, which includes a preview of the arguments and all the most important documents. In addition to the lower court opinion, petition for cert, and briefs of the parties, there are dozens of amicus briefs, including one from our own Prof. Collins.