For the second time in two months, the Federal Circuit has issued a decision that describes a situation in which a software invention is eligible for patenting.
In Bascom Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility et al., the court reversed a district court's decision that found a content filtering system invention to be not patent-eligible.
The patent at issue covered a system by which a remote ISP server filters content that a client computer requests from a website. Claim 1 of the patent is directed to:
1. A content filtering system for
filtering content retrieved from an Internet computer network by
individual controlled access network accounts, said filtering
system comprising:
- a local client computer generating network access requests
for said individual controlled access network accounts;
- at least one filtering scheme;
- a plurality of sets of logical filtering elements;
and
- a remote ISP server coupled to said client computer and said
Internet computer network, said ISP server associating each said
network account to at least one filtering scheme and at least one
set of filtering elements, said ISP server further receiving said
network access requests from said client computer and executing
said associated filtering scheme utilizing said associated set of
logical filtering elements.
The Federal Circuit noted that "[t]he claims do not merely recite the abstract idea of filtering content along with the requirement to perform it on the Internet, or perform it on a set of generic computer components...nor do the claims preempt all ways of filtering content on the Internet; rather, they recite a specific, discrete implementation of the abstract idea of filtering content."
The court also cautioned against confusing patent-eligibility with obviousness: "The district court's analysis in this case ... looks similar to an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. 103, except lacking an explanation of a reason to combine the limitations as claimed. The inventive concept inquiry requires more than recognizing that each claim element, by itself, was known in the art. As is the case here, an inventive concept can be found in the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of known, conventional pieces."
The decision closely follows the Federal Circuit's recent decision in Enfish LLC v. Microsoft Corporation, in which the court cautioned against a broad interpretnation of Alice v. CLS Bank as holding that all improvements in computer-related technology are inherently abstract.
Thanks to my colleague Brienne Terril with help writing this post.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
