After the Supreme Court's recent decision in Alice v. CLS Bank, blog posts, articles, and web forums exploded with criticism and confusion. What is the Court doing? Doesn't the Court know the difference between subject matter eligibility and novelty or non-obviousness analysis? Can't the Court see it is killing the software industry?
The short answer is that the Alice decision is actually a very positive step in the evolution of patent law. What the Supreme Court has done in Alice, Myriad and other recent cases, is to give the patent office and the courts much needed tools to enforce proportionality between contribution to society and scope of protection.
"Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered."
For more than 20 years, many patent attorneys and agents have been using clever wordsmithing to lock up vast areas of technology based on what are arguably only small contributions to society. Unfortunately, while those strategies have been perfectly legal, they have seriously upended the constitutional mandate to promote "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" and actually stifle this progress, especially in the areas of computer software, business methods and genetics.
Fish & Tsang Senior Associate Lindy M. Herman was recently named to the Southern California Super Lawyers 2014 Rising Stars list. The list recognizes no more than 2.5 percent of lawyers in the state, and this is Lindy's second consecutive year being honored. Everyone at F&T congratulates her for this accomplishment and recognition on such a prestigious list!
In her practice, Lindy counsels clients in copyright infringement, trademark disputes and related business manners. She has more than seven years of experience and has represented clients in state and federal cases, as well as international disputes. She graduated from Whittier Law School and holds certificates in Intellectual Property Law and International & Comparative Law.