The chart above shows the cumulative law review citation count for the Supreme Court's leading pre-Bilski patentable subject matter decisions. The data is based on a westlaw keycite search, each law review article is counted only once per case. Thus, if an article that cites Diehr twenty times only adds one to the tally.
14 thoughts on “Citations to Supreme Court Patentable Subject Matter Jurisprudence”
Like totally cool Google today in memory of John Lennon.
“especially since the lines don’t seem to cross at all.”
There’s something very important I forgot to tell you.
Don’t cross the lines.
It would be bad.
I’m fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, “bad”?
Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
Total protonic reversal.
Right. That’s bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.
How about using some simple geometric shapes instead of colors so that color blind folks can tell what the lines are??? The old xxx’s and ooos and different dashes work great…12
You should include not only Funk v Kalo, but O’Reilly v Morse, too. It might be interesting to do a copyright parallel and include Baker v Selden.11
EG, you are correct – Bilksi will zoom up the ranks quickly enough.
Benson and Flook will never catch up to Diehr. Never. Anytime either are mentioned, Diehr must be mentioned because as Bilski 14 points out – both Benson and Flook are cabin’ed by Diehr.
If it seems as if the Diehrbots have gobbled up the Bensonites and Flookettes, it is because they have. Diehr Rules.
The Stevens legacy of the earlier Supreme Court decisions has been lost and that loss sealed in Bilski. The long and publicly silent battle in the cloistered Supreme Court chambers shows Stevens to be the loser and the actual iventors to be the winners.
What this graph may show is that Chakrabarty and Diehr, being the more recent SCOTUS cases, are cited more because they’re viewed as representing the current SCOTUS view on patent-eligibility. You’ll likely see the same thing happen as Bilski is cited in the law reviews.9
Agreed that the relative citation count is interesting, especially since the lines don’t seem to cross at all.