Business model patent

The Business model patent (business model とっきょ) points at overall patent that invention to affect a business method (business model) is given in a broad sense [¹], but is used in the meaning called the patent that invention generally to modify a business method using the computer software of the narrow sense more is given.

Name

"Business method patent" existed in the United States from the 1980s, and this came to be called "Business model patent" in Japan [²].

The invention to affect a business method is called "business-related invention" or "invention about the business model", and "Business model patent" is called "a business method patent" or "the patent about the method of the business" by the patent that it is given. "Business-related invention" calls each "a business method patent" in this clause as follows.

I use the inherent name called "the patent of the business method" of convenience to express this object in the Japanese Patent Office, but the patent that distinguishes it from others, and is treated particularly does not exist and does not change at all with the normal patent that business-related invention is given, and the legal system to give a business method the protection of the special kind does not exist [³].

The business-related invention is often classified in 705 by G06F 17/60, a US Patent classification (USC) by an international patent classification (IPC).

History

References and the source which I can inspect are not shown at all, or this article is insufficient.
You add the source, and please cooperate with the reliability improvement of the article. (May, 2012)

A seal was shown "not to be able to say that a patent did not have it in the judgment of the state street bank case in the United States of July, 1998 promptly because it was a business method". It became clear to be able to become the patent, and applications of the invention business-related in the United States in this way increased rapidly even if it was a business method because, besides, misunderstanding that it was was born in the patent by the pure business method. In Japan, it was delayed a few by the news about the trend of this case in the United States, and the application of this field that was approximately 4,100 cases in 1999 invited the rapid increase of the application as it was to approximately 19,600 cases of approximately 5 times in 2000.^[4]It accelerated an unlimited application in those days that there were not having been shown definitely what became the patent and an example given a patent for a common business method particularly in the United States without the system of each country Patent Office for the business-related invention being fixed enough.

Not new application, I interpreted the patent that I applied to a past for forcibly to some extent, and the trial to insist on when I used the patent was performed (submarine patent), and a patent claim was performed about hyperlink, a JPEG format, a dialogue message [the ^{source required}].

As an aftermath

I take the patent like a patent of the kanban of Toyota first of all saying "there is not the intention to limit the use of other companies, but took the patent before I am applied to the other companies"
The GIF format which I was able to use in a patent claim of Unisys freely till then was not usable.
The company which applies for a trademark at random like KONAMI
Though there is not it, I control the intention to use the domain name for

I invited confusion in など, a patent, the world of the First come, first served such as the trademark.

When it was after 2000, the administrative system was gradually fixed, and it came to be recognized afterwards that a pure business method did not become the patent generally either. According to the statistics of the Patent Office, the refusal assessment rate of the business-related invention of the boom period reached approximately 92%, and most of the application were not established as a patent. In addition, in the American Patent Office, the patent rate of the business-related invention falls to a little less than 20% by tightening of the examination.^[5]

In the Patent Office, I comment saying it "is expected that the ratio of the application that the extremely in comparison with other fields low situation continues, and a ratio to become the patent when I see the examination situation for the business-related invention remains in around 8% from 2003 through 2005, and is made a right through examination, an umpire in the business-related invention according to the ... this and others will examine the need of the query closely carefully in future because the extremely low situation continues.".^[6]

I receive such a turn of eventss, and the boom of mass applications of the business-related invention calms, but the application of the fixed quantity is performed even now. Particularly, digital content business, an advertisement, the ratio of application of the field in conjunction with the marketing increase.^[7]

Chronological table [⁸]

1908: A hotel security case happened in the United States [⁹]; [¹⁰].
1983: By U.S. Merrill Lynch judgment, a business method was shown to become the patent.
1994: The American Patent Office revised examination guidelines and added a business method patent.
1995: Financial institutions such as Fuji Bank or Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank performed formal objection, and, in Japan, they gave "the refusal examination" that the Patent Office did not assume a patent in acknowledgment of an objection to an "electronic money patent" advertisement of Citibank Bank.
1996: The American Patent Office revised examination guidelines and wrote clearly that I did not make a special standard for a business method patent.
July, 1998: "A principle to the exclusion of a business method" collapsed in the United States, and a business method patent was accepted legally by state street case judgment.
August, 1998: "A name-your-price auction patent" of price line dot-com company was concluded.
January, 1999: Citibank, N Ei Corporation stated the refusal assessment dissatisfaction umpire about "an electronic money patent" for the Japanese Patent Office.
April, 1999: The American Patent Office accepted the business method patent about the long-distance call service system of AT&T Corporation.
October, 1999: Price line dot-com company accused Microsoft and Expedia Corporation saying that I violated a name-your-price auction patent.
October, 1999: Amazon.com company accused Barnes & Noble Corporation saying that I violated a one-click patent. (in December, 1999, Amazon company wins the case by Seattle district court judgment)
November, 1999: Juliet Harrington accused Yahoo! Corporation saying that I violated a shopping cart patent.
November, 1999: Double click company accused L90 company saying that I violated the patent about the banner ad of the user targeting method.
November, 1999: It revised Patent Law in America and accepted the last inventor right for the business method.
December, 1999: The Japanese Patent Office accepted Citibank, "an electronic money patent" of N Ei Corporation as a patent.
December, 1999: The Japanese Patent Office announced "about the handling of the examination in the business-related invention".
January, 2000: Alane Conrad brought an action against 39 companies including the manufacturing industry in total in the United States saying that I violated a business method patent.
January, 2000: Sumitomo Bank was the settlement service using the virtual account and acquired the first Business model patent by the Japanese company in Japan.
April, 2000: IS company issued warning about the patent infringement about the E-mail for 50 providers in the United States.
October, 2000: The Japanese Patent Office announced "about the patent of the business method".

Example

Open market shopping cart

Patent summary

"A network marketing system"
On February 3, 1998, I register in the United States
Open market incorporated

The consumers are necessary, and they put a purchase article desired in a shopping cart in the virtual supermarket on the Internet site or a virtual shopping mall. It is not every individual product and performs the procedure for the purchase as the total sum only once last. Personal identification was accompanied with a risk at the dawn when the Internet had begun to show an expanse, and invention was demanded from the certification. As of 2012, a similar method is adopted in almost all shopping malls in the Internet [¹¹].

Name-your-price auction

Patent summary

"The apparatus and method for commercial network systems helped by the code that was designed to promote a proposal of the purchase with the buyer-led condition"
On August 11, 1998, I register in the United States
Walker asset management asset limited partners

Originally I was devised because an airline reduced a vacant seat. The consumers input the purchase requirements (route, the date and time, class) of the airline ticket in an intermediation site of the Internet that price line dot-com company runs, and each airline shows a price depending on the condition that I received from price line dot-com company. Price line dot-com company mediates the sale of the cheapest airline ticket to consumers on a site. Because credit card information is found at the time of a price of airline ticket inquiry, consumers are people having high purchase intention, and the later purchase procedure can expect quick certain が, too.

U.S. most airlines participate in the airline ticket sale site by this method of price line dot-com company. In addition, price line dot-com company does not remain only to an airline ticket and adopts it until a hotel, a rent-a-car, the sale intermediation of life miscellaneous goods widely [¹²].

One-click

Patent summary

"A method and a system to propose the purchase order through the communication network"
On September 28, 1999, I register in the United States
Amazon.com

When consumers purchase it on the Internet, and they make a deal, is complicated, reinputing it can omit an address or contact information or the credit card number such as the phone number only by input of the user ID after the second purchasing 1 degree if I register.

In those days when Amazon company applied for this business method registration, many companies had uneasiness in reliability in technique to settle a purchase application and process of payment only with the electronic intelligence through the Internet screen. In addition, I thought that the customer felt relieved by repeating necessary information for a customer every time, and demanding input. I thought that it was good Amazon company continued the relatively cheap articles such as books to a customer many times, and to have you purchase it and decided to finish a necessary registration procedure only at first once. When the purchasing using the Internet spread, such a simple and easy method became the standard [¹³].

Patent-related criterion of the business method patent

The judgment (patent-related judgment) whether or not invention becomes the patent is carried out based on Patent Law. There is not in particular the rule established for a business method patent, but, in the Patent Law, a judgment in a trial example and the Patent Office which assumed establishment characteristics of the invention the point at issue about a business method is accumulated since before computer software came to be used. In addition, I make a patent, a utility model examination standard to make a patent-related criterion in the examination clear in the Patent Office, but it is about the standards such as establishment characteristics of the invention that I stood on the trial examples mentioned above.

For example, about the establishment-related example of the invention, "software and hardware resources were judged in an examination standard in a judgment cancellation request case (2005 (line ケ) 10698th September 26, 2006) intellectual property high court by the concrete means that collaborated by software being read by a computer although the thing using the computer was assumed as "a point management method" of the vows by Buddhas in previous lives or worlds to save all sentient beings invention saying, there was not mention that could only grasp the movement method of the special information processing device which accepted a purpose of use by realizing operation of the information that accepted a purpose of use or processing" even if they lighted it up when not admitted that it was creation of the technical thought that used a natural rule.

The right use of the taboo request was judged without the utility model right being established because the technical constitution based on the natural rule was not included in the characteristic part of the essential device saying, "the description of top this matter device was creation for the human mind activity itself that used an economic law constant exclusively to accounts law, and it could not be said that it was the creation that used a natural rule" in the request case (the 2002 (ワ) 5502nd) Tokyo District Court January 20, 2003 judgment as for the violation of utility model right taboos about the balance sheet of the general account again when I did not admit.

As a similar example, as for patent 3023658 (presentation method of the wedding ceremony present), cancellation decision is accomplished in Patent Office Department of Appeal on April 18, 2001, and a right becomes extinct on June 11.

In 2000, an examination standard about "Computer Software Organization Co, Ltd.-affiliated invention" was added as "the examination standard of the specific technical area". You may think that the examination is performed in conformity with a normal examination standard and a standard about this "computer software-related invention" today because the business method patent becoming the problem relates to the invention that systematized a business method by computer software. In this standard, the principal objective is put only in the technique of the business including the method of a form and the transaction of the business, and it is said to technical parts such as the computer software that the thing that there is not a characteristic does not meet requirements of the invention. Cf. patent software for more information about a standard.

The example that a business method patent was invalidated

There are few trial examples about the business method patent in the narrow sense using a computer. For a right range having got narrow by an invalidity umpire as for the action for infringement of patent 3179409th that became the topic because Japan Airlines accused All Nippon Airways, the patent 3400447th (ticket reservation system), Japan Airlines came to abandon compensation for damages request.

In this way, as for a patent being canceled in business-related invention, and a right being reduced in a process of the invalid judgment, a conventional technique does not exist in the form such as a patent document and the treatise, and it is the greatest cause by the people concerned after examination newly that the documents such as catalogues are submitted, and a judgment overturns. Therefore, the improvement of examination document is pursued in the Patent Office to have even collaborative investigation of the all of nature Patent Office pointed out, and it is demanded from relations company and the general public what I contribute to so that a more appropriate judgment is done by submitting an examination document so that it is performed flourishingly in the United States.^[14]^[15]

In addition, it is brought into question in a part that the patent that the Patent Office gave is invalidated with high probability in invalid judgment. However, it be slightly around several hundred cases that invalid judgment is demanded soon whereas approximately 100,000 patents are concluded in the year (for this, the dissatisfied umpire for the refusal assessment is submitted more than 20,000 cases a year.) It is hard to say that many patents become invalid in, true case.^[16]^[17]

"Data handling system (a popular name "hub-and-spoke case") for a hub and spoke financial service constitution" which came into the limelight by a state street bank case was applied to Japan for as 特願平 4-507,889 issue. However, I refused it in 2001 and was assessed, and the judgment of not being able to receive a patent in a refusal assessment dissatisfaction umpire case in August, 2004 was accomplished. The Business model patent which created a big sensation did not in this way become the patent in Japan.