<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wikidot="http://www.wikidot.com/rss-namespace">

	<channel>
		<title>Business Method Patents: Technological Change, Not Judicial Activism</title>
		<link>http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-195235/business-method-patents:technological-change-not-judicial-activism</link>
		<description>Posts in the discussion thread &quot;Business Method Patents: Technological Change, Not Judicial Activism&quot; - The last two decades have seen an extraordinary growth in the number of patent
applications for business technologies and methods. Critics of business method patents tend to
assign responsibility for this development to judicial activism by the judges of the Federal
Circuit especially those responsible for the decision in State Street [...] The judicial activism thesis may have a superficial appeal. [...] Yet the judicial activism thesis suffers from multiple glaring problems and
plainly cannot account for the timing of the rise in business method patenting, which plainly
began well before State Street.</description>
				<copyright></copyright>
		<lastBuildDate></lastBuildDate>
		
					<item>
				<guid>http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-195235#post-628670</guid>
				<title>Business Method Patents: Technological Change, Not Judicial Activism</title>
				<link>http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-195235/business-method-patents:technological-change-not-judicial-activism#post-628670</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:58:50 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>ggiedke</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>32664</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p><em>"The last two decades have seen an extraordinary growth in the number of patent applications for business technologies and methods. Critics of business method patents tend to assign responsibility for this development to judicial activism by the judges of the Federal Circuit especially those responsible for the decision in State Street […] The judicial activism thesis may have a superficial appeal. […] Yet the judicial activism thesis suffers from multiple glaring problems and plainly cannot account for the timing of the rise in business method patenting, which plainly began well before State Street."</em></p> <p>Source: <a href="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/11/business-method-patents-technological-change-not-judicial-activism.html">http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/11/business-method-patents-technological-change-not-judicial-activism.html</a></p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
				</channel>
</rss>