Supreme Court to hear oral arguments regarding scope of US patent law

February 21, 2007
Post by Blog Staff

This morning the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., a case about the potential extraterritorial reach of United States patent law. Specifically, the case deals with § 271(f)(1), which states that:

(f)(1) Whoever without authority supplies or causes to be supplied in or from the United States all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention, where such components are uncombined in whole or in part, in such manner as to actively induce the combination of such components outside of the United States in a manner that would infringe the patent if such combination occurred within the United States, shall be liable as an infringer.
The issue in this case is whether software code can be considered a "component" of a patented invention, such that when shipped overseas and installed on a computer in a foreign country, liability under § 271(f)(1) is triggered. Specifically, the questions presented to the Court are:
(1) Whether digital software code--an intangible sequence of "1's" and "0's"--may be considered a "component[] of a patented invention" within the meaning of Section 271(f)(1); and, if so, (2) Whether copies of such a "component[]" made in a foreign country are "supplie[d] . . . from the United States."
The patent at issue, Reissue Patent No. 32,580, covers a system for speech pattern processing. AT&T alleged that Microsoft incorporated a program into its Windows® operating system that infringed this patent. For purposes of this case, the key aspect is AT&T's assertion that because Microsoft exported "golden master" disks encoding the Windows® to other countries where they were subsequently installed onto computers, Microsoft is liable for infringement under § 271(f)(1). As an interesting side note, Chief Justice Roberts has recused himself from the case, so the decision could come out as a 4-4 tie. AT&T was successful both at the district court and before the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit's decision can be found here. This afternoon, the transcript of the oral argument will be available on the Supreme Court's website here. Media previews of the oral arguments: CNBC
Business Week
CNN Money
Blog coverage: Patently-O (Patently-O also has the briefs available here)
Supreme Court Times

Post Categories

Comments (0)
Post a Comment

Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog

Search Posts


The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.


McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.