{"id":4623,"date":"2017-01-19T17:56:32","date_gmt":"2017-01-19T17:56:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sls.gmu.edu\/cpip\/?p=4623"},"modified":"2026-02-03T21:03:15","modified_gmt":"2026-02-03T21:03:15","slug":"trading-technologies-v-cqg-federal-circuit-gets-one-right-on-software-patents","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/2017\/01\/19\/trading-technologies-v-cqg-federal-circuit-gets-one-right-on-software-patents\/","title":{"rendered":"[Archived Post] Trading Technologies v. CQG: Federal Circuit Gets One Right On Software Patents"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"dictionaryThe Federal Circuit issued another important opinion yesterday affirming that software is a patentable invention in the United States. In Trading Technologies Int\u2019l, Inc. v. CQG, Inc.<\/em><\/a>, the court determined that a graphical user interface (GUI) for a commodities trading platform was patent eligible. Ten law professors, including CPIP Senior Scholars and others, filed an amicus brief<\/a> in support of Trading Technologies, explaining that its GUI patents were a patentable inventions under \u00a7 101 of the Patent Act and that this is exactly the type of twenty-first-century innovation the patent system is intended to promote and secure. (CPIP\u2019s Adam Mossoff<\/a> was one of the co-authors of the amicus brief as well.)<\/p>\n

The accused infringer in this case argued that Trading Technologies\u2019 two<\/a> patents <\/a>were unpatentable because they were an \u201cabstract idea\u201d under \u00a7 101 of the Patent Act. This opinion arose from the infringer raising this defense in response to Trading Technologies\u2019 lawsuit against it for patent infringement. Despite the defendant\u2019s arguments that the patents merely broadly referred to the abstract idea of \u201ccommodities trading,\u201d both of the GUI patents describe technological improvements in the interface that commodities traders use. The court discussed how the inventors\u2019 specific improvements in this GUI program increases the efficiency and accuracy of trading\u2014a real-world, valuable function in a twenty-first-century technological innovation. Thus, these patents cover inventions that are more than just an abstract idea.<\/p>\n

As described by the law professors\u2019 amicus brief, the defendant\u2019s broad argument about the \u201cabstract idea\u201d exclusion in patent law would eviscerate the patent system. Any invention can be described at a high level of abstraction, and thus an overly broad understanding of \u201cabstract idea\u201d would invalidate patents on thousands of legitimate patents on valid inventions, such as the telephone, GPS, typewriters, and optical discs. In this case, the court properly recognized that this framing of the \u201cabstract idea\u201d rule in patent law necessarily incorrect. Hopefully, this decision will stem the tide of massive invalidations of patented innovation, as more courts recognize the value in software inventions<\/a> and that patents are important for promoting and securing this innovation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Federal Circuit issued another important opinion yesterday affirming that software is a patentable invention in the United States. In Trading Technologies Int\u2019l, Inc. v. CQG, Inc., the court determined that a graphical user interface (GUI) for a commodities trading platform was patent eligible. Ten law professors, including CPIP Senior Scholars and others, filed an […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3627,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[26,48],"tags":[75,83,551,1304,1477],"class_list":["post-4623","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-innovation-2","category-software-patent-high-tech-industry","tag-abstract-idea","tag-adam-mossoff","tag-federal-circuit","tag-section-101","tag-trading-technologies"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4623","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3627"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4623"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4623\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15828,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4623\/revisions\/15828"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4623"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4623"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/ualawip\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4623"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}