Is Software Patentable? 美國專家探討軟體獲得專利權的前景

　　由於很多發明都與軟體有關，因此眾多發明人都希望能夠為這樣一種發明去申請專利。然而，希望歸希望，問題是軟體發明真的可以獲得專利權嗎？基於近期美國一起案件的裁決結果，似乎這個問題的答案是肯定的。換言之，軟體發明有可能會獲得專利權，但這將取決於該款軟體的功能。

Many inventions involve software, and many inventors are interested in protecting such inventions with a patent. The question is: are software inventions patentable? Based on recent cases in the United States, the answer is: yes, software inventions may be patentable, but it depends on what the software does.

　　根據《專利法》的基本規則，人們仍然不能為某種抽象概念申請專利。在過去的多年時間裏，那些為借助電腦與軟體實施的方法申請專利的主張一直在法庭上得不到任何支持，理由是僅僅利用通用電腦來實施抽象概念的行為並不能讓上述抽象概念獲得專利權。自美國最高法院於2014年在對愛麗絲公司（AliceCorp.）起訴持續聯繫結算銀行（CLS Bank）一案作出裁決後（該起涉及軟體專利的案件對專利適格客體的測試方法做出了修訂），絕大部分與軟體相關的專利申請都在法院上遭到了駁回。愛麗絲公司在該案中所提出的專利權主張涉及到一種用於在各方之間實施中間結算的方法。

It remains a general rule, in patent law, that one cannot obtain a patent for an abstract idea. Over the years, patent claims for methods implemented by computers and software have been struck down by the courts, on the basis that merely using a general-purpose computer to implement an abstract idea does not make the abstract idea patentable. More recently, since the Supreme Court of the United States' 2014 decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, a software patent case providing a revised test for determining what is patentable subject matter, most patents containing claims to software challenged in US courts have been struck down. The patent claims at issue in Alice were directed to a method for implementing an intermediated settlement between parties.

　　然而，通常發明人都清楚軟體可以實施的方法應該是能夠解決技術問題的技術方案。因此，這種軟體實施的方法可能要遠遠超過在一台電腦上實施抽象概念的程度。而下文中將羅列出一些在美國聯邦巡迴法庭上被認定為是可以獲得專利權的軟體專利主張：

However, as inventors know, software can implement methods which are technical solutions to technical problems. Such software-implemented methods may therefore rise beyond the level of merely implementing an abstract idea on a computer. Below are some examples of software patent claims which have been deemed patent eligible in recent United States Federal Circuit cases:

• 能夠解決僅存在於互聯網上的問題的軟體。在DDR起訴Hotels.com一案中，涉案的專利解決了下列問題：如果正在流覽互聯網上某個網站的訪客點擊了一個廣告，那麼這名訪客通常會被重新定向到打出該廣告的網站，從而使得之前的網站失去了原本屬於自己的互聯網流量。而該專利提出的技術方案就是在訪客點擊廣告之後將其引導至一個混合型的網站，這個混合型的網站既包含此前網站的外觀與整體感覺，同時也含有打出廣告的網站資訊。

• Software which solves a problem that only exists on the internet. In DDR v. Hotels.com, the patent at issue addressed the problem that when a person browsing the internet clicks on an advertisement on a host website, the person is typically redirected to the advertiser's website, causing the host website to lose internet traffic. The solution was to direct the person to a hybrid website upon clicking an advertisement, the hybrid website retaining the look and feel of the host's website while containing the information from the advertiser's website.

• 能夠改善電腦功能的軟體。在Enfish起訴微軟（Microsoft）一案中，涉案專利涉及到一種用於資料庫的創新型邏輯模型，其中包括創建出一種自我參照表格（self-referential table）。另一個實例則是Amdocs起訴Openet一案，其中涉案專利的權利要求包括以一種創新的形式來收集網路資訊，從而改善網路的功能。

• Software which improves the functioning of a computer. In Enfish v. Microsoft, the patent at issue had claims directed to an innovative logical model for a database, including the creation of a self-referential table. Another example includes Amdocs v. Openet, in which the patents at issue included claims directed to gathering network information in an innovative manner, which improved the functioning of the network.

• 能夠使人工流程變成自動化的軟體。在McRo起訴萬代（Bandai）公司的案件中，涉案專利的權利要求包括對動畫人物與音頻配樂進行自動同步。儘管一部分法院認為僅僅是將可由人工完成的流程進行自動化並不適合獲得專利，但是在這起案件中，人們卻認為權利要求中的流程（即電腦執行了同步工作）與動畫製作者隨後手動進行同步的流程截然不同。

• Software which automates a manual process. In McRo v. Bandai, the patent at issue had claims directed to the automatic synchronization of an animated character with an audio soundtrack. While some courts have held that merely automating a process that may be manually performed by a human is not patent eligible, in this case, it was found that the claimed process in which the computer performed the synchronization was different than the process followed by a human animator to manually perform the synchronization.

　　目前，獲得與軟體有關的專利權仍然困難重重。而且，一旦法院對於軟體專利的適格性提出質疑，那麼這項專利申請極有可能會在法庭上遭遇駁回。例如，近些年加拿大的高等法院就沒有針對軟體專利以及專利客體適格性作出過判決，而這也為此類案件的審理帶來了不確定性。不過，近期美國聯邦巡迴法庭的裁決至少在美國境內為軟體專利是否能獲得專利權給出了判例，並因此就何種軟體發明可以獲得專利權為未來的軟體發明人提供了有益的指導。

Today, it remains difficult to obtain a patent having claims directed to software, and even once a software patent issues, there is a possibility it could be struck down as patent ineligible if challenged in the courts. Adding to the uncertainty is a lack of higher court decisions in Canada, in recent years, involving the issue of software patents and subject matter eligibility. However, the recent US Federal Circuit case law helpfully provides examples of software patent claims that were upheld as patent eligible, at least in the United States, therefore giving future software inventors some guidance as to which software inventions may be patentable.

轉載自MONDAQ