One purpose of the patent system is to promote, not stifle, innovation. This line between promoting and stifling innovation can become a bit fuzzy. For example, patentees seek to protect functionality of their inventions by use of functional claim limitations that describe claim features in terms of their results without providing any specificity as to what the features are or how the claimed results are accomplished. On the face of it, such functional claim limitations may cover all ways of accomplishing the claimed results, including ways that are unknown at the time of the invention, which may deter others from attempting to invent improved ways of achieving the results.
Congress recognized this potentially detrimental effect of functional claiming and in the Patent Act of 1952 introduced a statute that limited the scope of a functionally claimed limitation to cover “the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.” This statute, currently codified under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), has remained essentially unchanged since its inception. But, as with many aspects of patent law, application of the statute has evolved and particularly in more recent years with the proliferation of patents directed to software-related inventions.Peter Sistare
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]