Gottschalk v. Benson
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Gottschalk_v._Benson an entity of type: Thing
Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that a process claim directed to a numerical algorithm, as such, was not patentable because "the patent would wholly pre-empt the mathematical formula and in practical effect would be a patent on the algorithm itself." That would be tantamount to allowing a patent on an abstract idea, contrary to precedent dating back to the middle of the 19th century. The ruling stated "Direct attempts to patent programs have been rejected [and] indirect attempts to obtain patents and avoid the rejection ... have confused the issue further and should not be permitted." The case was argued on October 16, 1972, and was decided November 20, 1972.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Gottschalk v. Benson
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Gottschalk, Acting Commissioner of Patents v. Benson, et al.
xsd:integer
10003934
xsd:integer
1019027390
rdf:langString
Diamond v. Diehr, Diamond v. Chakrabarty
rdf:langString
Burger, Brennan, White, Marshall, Rehnquist
rdf:langString
ยง 101 of the Patent Act of 1952
<second>
172800.0
<second>
17280.0
xsd:integer
63
xsd:integer
409
xsd:gMonthDay
--10-16
xsd:integer
1972
rdf:langString
Gottschalk v. Benson,
xsd:gMonthDay
--11-20
xsd:integer
1972
rdf:langString
Gottschalk, Acting Commissioner of Patents v. Benson, et al.
rdf:langString
Respondents' method for converting numerical information from binary-coded decimal numbers into pure binary numbers, for use in programming conventional general-purpose digital computers is merely a series of mathematical calculations or mental steps and does not constitute a patentable "process" within the meaning of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. 100 . Pp. 64-73.
rdf:langString
Gottschalk v. Benson
rdf:langString
Douglas
rdf:langString
Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that a process claim directed to a numerical algorithm, as such, was not patentable because "the patent would wholly pre-empt the mathematical formula and in practical effect would be a patent on the algorithm itself." That would be tantamount to allowing a patent on an abstract idea, contrary to precedent dating back to the middle of the 19th century. The ruling stated "Direct attempts to patent programs have been rejected [and] indirect attempts to obtain patents and avoid the rejection ... have confused the issue further and should not be permitted." The case was argued on October 16, 1972, and was decided November 20, 1972.
rdf:langString
Stewart, Blackmun, and Powell
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
9772