Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


+ - What Bilski Meant for Biotech Patents->

Submitted by
eldavojohn writes "Patents aren't just a software thing and while Bilski's Dismissal didn't shake the ground for software, it certainly is making waves in the biotech community. You may recall Prometheus v. Mayo in which doctors fought a biotech startup's methodology patents. Well, medical method patents (like Prometheus and another) are now being reconsidered on orders by the Supreme Court of certiorari (judicial review). Stocks of biotech startups jumped as this news broke but the question still remains how the lower Federal Circuit court will rule when it reconsiders these cases of medical testing. It's clear that the Supreme Court has 'ruled that judges should be more flexible in determining if methods, rather than objects, are eligible for patents, citing emerging technologies such as medical testing.' So Bilski may result in dire news for medical methods and testing patents."
Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Bilski Meant for Biotech Patents

Comments Filter:

"It ain't so much the things we don't know that get us in trouble. It's the things we know that ain't so." -- Artemus Ward aka Charles Farrar Brown