컴퓨터 소프트웨어 발명의 특허적격성에 관한 미국판례에 따른 판단기준

A patent-eligibility to a computer software invention has been a subject of controversy, especially in inventions relating to business methods. The Alice Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that "merely requiring generic computer implementation fails to transform that abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention." Meanwhile, in 2013, CAFC (en banc) suggested at least three criteria in this case. The CAFC judges concurred in opinion that a claim including abstract idea should have a meaningful limitation, but they showed different opinions in that what is the meaningful limitation. The Majority held that "the claim can be evaluated to determine whether it contains additional substantive limitations that confine the claim so that it does not cover the abstract idea itself," which was accepted by the Supreme Court. However, the criterion of patent-eligibility may be changed with the times and situations, especially more so in case of a computer software invention which is rapidly advanced in technology and is widely influenced in industries. After the mid-2000s, the U.S. courts have become going in the direction to adopt more rigorous standard of patent-eligibility to these inventions. The Alice Supreme Court also seems to reflect such tendency. It is predictable that it may be difficult to cross the threshold of patent-eligibility in case of a computer software invention applied to non-technical fields.