案件資訊：
原告/上訴人：DATA ENGINE TECHNOLOGIES LLC (DET)
被告/被上訴人：GOOGLE LLC
系爭專利：US5,590,259; US5,784,545; US6,282,551; and US5,303,146
判決日：October 9, 2018
系爭專利（如US5,590,259，申請日在1995年）關於一種試算表（spreadsheet）介面的技術，特別是具有使用者熟習的物件的試算表介面，以下這張截圖（從判決與系爭專利說明書中截出）顯示試算表與下方的「標籤/tab」，可以讓使用者選擇標籤（page identifier）而快速切換到不同的試算表，取代在很大的試算表中要上下拉動找資料的方式，這就是系爭專利改善電腦技術的地方，提供快速切換試算表的標籤。
以上這個技術似乎常見，但是DET舉出同時期的技術，如：“Quattro Pro for Windows: The Ultimate 3-D Spreadsheet”，當中提出了很多試算表的實用方法，以此證明專利技術在當時的水平，也證明專利技術解決了當時使用試算表的問題。這裡查到2007年PC World雜誌的報導：https://www.pcworld.com/article/133221/article.html。
原告DET對Google提出侵權告訴，列舉其中之一專利範圍Claim 12 of '259：
12. In an electronic spreadsheet system for storing and manipulating information, a computer-implemented method of representing a three-dimensional spreadsheet on a screen display, the method comprising:
displaying on said screen display a first spreadsheet page from a plurality of spreadsheet pages, each of said spreadsheet pages comprising an array of information cells arranged in row and column format, at least some of said information cells storing user-supplied information and formulas operative on said user-supplied information, each of said information cells being uniquely identified by a spreadsheet page identifier, a column identifier, and a row identifier;
while displaying said first spreadsheet page, displaying a row of spreadsheet page identifiers along one side of said first spreadsheet page, each said spreadsheet page identifier being displayed as an image of a notebook tab on said screen display and indicating a single respective spreadsheet page, wherein at least one spreadsheet page identifier of said displayed row of spreadsheet page identifiers comprises at least one user-settable identifying character;
receiving user input for requesting display of a second spreadsheet page in response to selection with an input device of a spreadsheet page identifier for said second spreadsheet page;
in response to said receiving user input step, displaying said second spreadsheet page on said screen display in a manner so as to obscure said first spreadsheet page from display while continuing to display at least a portion of said row of spreadsheet page identifiers; and
receiving user input for entering a formula in a cell on said second spreadsheet page, said formula including a cell reference to a particular cell on another of said spreadsheet pages having a particular spreadsheet page identifier comprising at least one user-supplied identifying character, said cell reference comprising said at least one user-supplied identifying character for said particular spreadsheet page identifier together with said column identifier and said row identifier for said particular cell.
Claim 1 of '551：
1. In an electronic spreadsheet for processing alphanumeric information, said said electronic spreadsheet comprising a three-dimensional spreadsheet operative in a digital computer and including a plurality of cells for entering data and formulas, a method for organizing the three-dimensional spreadsheet comprising:
partitioning said plurality of cells into a plurality of two-dimensional cell matrices so that each of the two-dimensional cell matrices can be presented to a user as a spreadsheet page;
associating each of the cell matrices with a user-settable page identifier which serves as a unique identifier for said each cell matrix;
creating in a first cell of a first page at least one formula referencing a second cell of a second page said formula including the user-settable page identifier for the second page; and
storing said first and second pages of the plurality of cell matrices such that they appear to the user as being stored within a single file.
在現在的標準下，如地方法院判決，認為這類技術並不符可專利標的，認為在相關應用程式中加入標籤以方便管理試算表的技術為抽象概念，也是一般使用者腦中執行的行為，因此認為系爭專利範圍不具有可以轉換抽象概念為可專利標的的"inventive concept"。
"The district court also held that additional claim limitations directed to electronic spreadsheets failed to provide an inventive concept sufficient to confer patent eligibility."
案件經上訴進入CAFC，討論之前又宣告了101相關議題的歷史與案例，本案最終是要判斷這類軟體"抽象概念"的專利範圍中的元件的單一或是組合是否足以實質超越抽象概念等不可專利的概念？
系爭專利範圍（以Claim 12 of '259代表）關於改善試算表使用上的缺點，提供更直覺與友善的使用者介面技術，確實是有很多證據證明這個方式很好用。這裡提到過去案例Core Wireless，這個案例教示我們：申請專利範圍描述改進過去系統的方式，在電子裝置上提出改善的使用者介面，這是電腦功能的改善，具有可專利性。
Core Wireless案："We concluded that the claims were patent eligible because the claims “recite[d] a specific improvement over prior systems, resulting in an improved user interface for electronic devices,” and thus were directed to “an improvement in the functioning of computers."
對照本案（以Claim 12 of '259代表），這裡提供不同先前技術的使用者介面技術，取代過去上下拉動找資料的方式，可讓使用者快速存取"three-dimensional spreadsheets"的資料，這就如同上述Core Wireless案，應該是一種提供改善電腦技術的方案。
系爭專利為通過電腦化的技術解決習知使用者介面的問題，達到的功效是速度、準確度與可使用度。但Google的答辯是，涉及組織與表達資訊的技術為抽象概念，並沒有採用任何外部資源、新的分析技術，而且是人們使用這類試算表時，想會使用標籤來管理其中資訊的一般概念。但是，對於法院而言，這樣的「法律」議題需要根據系爭專利"涉及（directed to）"了甚麼發明來評斷，就整體來看，並參考系爭專利說明書內容。
最後，根據上述意見，即便Google有適當的答辯，但CAFC認為Claim 12 of '259已經通過TWO-STEP測試的step 2A，並非是抽象概念的技術，也就不用討論step 2B了，因此符合35 U.S.C. 101規定，為可專利的標的。
對於另一組發明，以Claim 1 of '551為代表，CAFC認為這個範圍為識別與儲存電腦試算表的技術，不同於Claim 12 of '259改善電腦技術的發明，認為僅涉及資訊識別，判為抽象概念（step 2A）。
因此需要討論step 2B，檢查專利範圍中是否具有可以轉換抽象概念為可專利應用的額外元件（"additional element transforms the nature of claim into patent-eligible application"），對於使用一般目的電腦的技術而言，需要檢驗發明是否超過僅是一般業界"公知、常規與習知"的活動？
在此檢驗下，CAFC判定Claim 1 of '551僅描述將試算表切割與儲存的技術，此為抽象概念本身，並未通過step 2B的檢驗，為不可專利標的。
CAFC對地院的判決作出部分同意與部分否決的判決。認為系爭專利中有關使用標籤（tab）的技術（改善電腦技術的軟體方法）符合35 U.S.C. § 101，但認為部分專利範圍涉及資訊組織與表示，為抽象而不可專利的標的。
判決文：
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/17-1135.Opinion.10-9-2018.pdf（備份：https://app.box.com/s/n2z06ygwso0cyinwnck2rco94f7migt4）
參考資料：
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2018/10/tabbed-spreadsheet-eligible.html
Ron
沒有留言:
張貼留言