특허보호대상을 건너뛴 특허요건- MySpace, Inc. v. GraphOn Corp. 사건판결을 중심으로

In patentability defense of Patent Infringement case that the patent atissue is invalid as being anticipated or obvious under sections 102 and103 of Patent Act of USA, there is no complicated issue as to whether ornot it is necessary to review that the patented invention-in-suit falls intothe patentable subject-matter under section 101 of Patent Act. Howeverthe essential but neglected issues can be found from the conflict ofmajority and dissenting opinions in MySpace, Inc. v. GraphOn Corp. Courtof Appeals for the Federal Circuit(CAFC). Both sides have reached thesame conclusion, but they were different from one another in drawing it. In MySpace, the issue is the ‘antecedent question’ of subject-mattereligibility which must be addressed before the court can consider whetheror not particular claims are invalid. In addition to the nexus betweensubject-matter eligibility and patentability, the case shows us what islegal and judicial policy meaning of abstract idea, invalidity defense onthe patent infringement case, and patent system for encouraging innovation. This article focuses on the dissenting opinion in MySpace with respectto abstract idea and subject-matter eligibility under the section 101 ofPatent Act, and on the linkage between patentable subject-matter such asbusiness method/ software and patent crisis and(/or) patent failure. Thiscase study gives us some considerations of the invention for innovationregarding subject-matter eligibility, abstract idea, and invention under sections 1, 2 and 29 of Patent Act of Republic of Korea.