C. Bohannan & H. Hovenkamp, Creation without Restraint: Promoting Liberty and Rivalry in Innovation 112 (2012) ("One problem with [process] patents is that the more abstractly their claims are stated, the more difficult it is to determine precisely what they cover. They risk being applied to a wide range of situations that were not anticipated by the patentee").
W. Landes & R. Posner, The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law 305–306 (2003) (The exclusion from patent law of basic truths reflects "both . . .the enormous potential for rent seeking that would be created if property rights could be obtained in them and. . . the enormous transaction costs that would be imposed on would-be users [of those truths]").
Lemley, Risch, Sichelman, & Wagner, Life After Bilski, 63 Stan. L. Rev. 1315 (2011)(arguing that patents on laws of nature would inhibit future innovations premised upon the law).
Risch, Everything is Patentable, 75 Tenn. L. Rev. 591 (2008) (defending a minimalist approach to §101) (the Court found that by 2011, Risch had changed his viewpoint as evidenced by the Lemley article).