The current patent culture was challenged in 2005 when the Supreme Court heard LabCorp v. Metabolite, a case that turned on what Klemens calls "a pathetically trivial physical step." In the end, the Supreme Court did not issue a ruling due to technicalities peculiar to the case, but, as Klemens says, "It does indicate that the Supreme Court takes seriously the problem of drawing a line that says that some things we humans do should not be patentable." Klemens adds that "Every pundit I've met agrees that the Supreme Court is looking for a case to replace [LabCorp v. Metabolite].
"On the legislative front, we've seen a number of bills for patent reform get shot down in the last few years. Reform is desperately needed, but it is stalled — and it's because of soft patents that it is stalled. Once we restore a rule that not everything can be patented, the rest of patent reform will either fall into place naturally or be much easier to fix.
"The key tactic, and the one which I am putting the best odds on, is a case to replace [LabCorp v. Metabolite]. But we are also looking at our Congress, and looking for a means to ensure that people can write software based on their own ingenuity without risk of being sued."
Finally some movement against Software Patents in the US.