Thanks to our friend Phil Weiser, who is at the US Department of Justice for the next couple of years, Brad, Amy and I were invited to watch the Bilski oral argument at the Supreme Court. If you don’t believe me, here is a picture of Brad and I on the steps of the courthouse (wearing suits, no less).
Having been a lawyer, I’ve always held deep opinions about the Supreme Court, many of which were obliterated today. I’d always imagined that the justices would be old, out of touch, disengaged, dry and not be able to really explore the weight of the issues in oral arguments given only one hour is allocated per hearing.
If we go to the scorecard:
Out of touch: definitely not
Disengaged: absolute not, so long as you don’t count Justice Thomas who looked like he’d rather be elsewhere and never said anything
Dry: no: Justic Breyer was cracking jokes, but Chief Justice Roberts is not exactly a humorless judge
Exploration: perhaps most surprisingly, an hour was more than enough
Final Tally: Jason’s Preconceived Notions: 1, New Found Opinions: 4
For those of you who don’t know, the Bilski argument addressed whether or not business methods are patentable. Anyone who follows my blog knows that I staunchly favor the abolishment of business method patents and also feel that most software patents are contrary to proper innovation policy. The judges allowed the Bilski camp about 2 minutes of uninterrupted argument and then launched directly into questioning. What was impressive was how direct and well prepared they were as they explored the key elements of the issues surrounding business method patents.
To me, it was apparent that the justices had grave concerns about the validity of these types of patents. In fact, when the rebuttal from the government came (on the side of getting rid of business method patents), the justices pushed him on why software should be patentable. The lawyer representing them (Malcolm Stewart) ducked and weaved as best as he could, but it felt like the court would have thrown out both business method patents AND software if he had stood up and said “they should go too, your honor.”
My bet is that business method patents are gone. What will be very interesting will be their language regarding software patents, as software validity wasn’t part of the case, but clearly on the justices’ minds.
All in all, I was massively impressed with the mental horsepower of the court and their ability to parse a very complicated subject in a short amount of time. Justice Breyer stood out as really engaged, but they all (but Thomas on this particular day) were impressive individuals. Thanks Phil. This was really a treat.
One item to note: if you get the chance to go to the Supreme Court, their cafe is mostly forgettable. Don’t get the French dressing. Way too much sugar. (Picture of Phil and I below at the cafe).