Brief of Amici Curiae Law, Business and Economic Scholars in Support of Respondents in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank International, et. al. By Jason M. Schultz* and Brian J. Love** A PDF version of this brief is available for download here. Summary Of Argument Argument I. Abstract Software Patents Discourage Innovation A. Abstract Software Patents Should Be Limited, as There is Little Evidence That Software Innovators Rely on Patenting for Incentives to Innovate and Compete. B. The Need for Socially Wasteful Defensive Bulwarks Has Primarily Driven Software Patenting Since Alappat and State Street, Rather than the Desire to Protect Investments in R&D or to Promote Competition. C. The Explosion of Patent Assertion Entity Activity Has Aggravated the Costs of Abstract Software Claims. D. A Robust Application of § 101’s Abstract Idea Prohibition Restores the Balance That Alappat and State Street Disrupted. II. Section 101 Ensures the Patent System Operates as an Efficient Property Rights System A. Abstract Software Patents Fail to Define Clear Metes and Bounds. B. Abstract Software Patents Fail to Provide Effective Public Notice. C. Abstract Software Patents Contribute to Troublesome Patent Thickets. III. Sections 102, 103, and 112 Are Not Replacements for the Role of § 101. A. Sections 102, 103, 112 Are Uniquely Ill-Suited to Correct Notice Problems in Software Patents. B. Sections 102, 103, and 112 Generate Greater Litigation Costs than § 101. Conclusion Interest of Amici Curiae Appendix Continue reading →
