TheBilski v.Kapposcase referenced in the text,involved a question of whether a business process explaining how buyers and sellers of commodities in the energy market can use hedging to protect against price fluctuations is patentable.How did the U.S.Supreme Court rule?
A) The court ruled that the claimed invention was a patent-eligible process.
B) The court ruled that the claimed invention was not a patent-eligible process because it was an abstract idea.
C) The court ruled that the claimed invention was not a patent-eligible process because under federal patent law, no business methods may be the subject of patents.
D) The court ruled that more information was needed regarding expected profits before a determination could be made as to patentability.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Bilski v. Kappos case that the claimed invention (a business process explaining hedging in the energy market) was not a patent-eligible process because it was an abstract idea. The court stated that abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomena are not patentable subject matter under Section 101 of the Patent Act.

TheBilski V