直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

A Comparison of the Patentability of Software in the United States and Europe

June 15, 2015

Computer Law Review International

By Philip L. Cupitt, Ph.D.; Linda J. Thayer

The patenting of software has long been a controversial subject. Despite vocal criticism from the open source movement, the number of patent applications filed for software and computer-implemented inventions has grown considerably over the past twenty years. This has challenged courts in the United States and Europe to balance patent applicants’ rights against the public interest through creative interpretations of patent statutes that predate the widespread adoption of computer technology. The latest twist in the tale came with last year’s decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International (see CRi 2014, 146), which established a new test for judging the patent eligibility of computer-implemented inventions. In this article, Finnegan attorneys Philip L. Cupitt and Linda J. Thayer summarize and compare the current law on the patentability of software in the United States and Europe, and consider the extent to which Alice has harmonised the law and practice in these jurisdictions.

Tags

software patents, patent application, Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS)

Related Practices

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Unitary Patent System (UPS) and the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

Third-Party Observations

Patent Oppositions and Appeals

Prosecution and Portfolio Management

Patent Term Extension (PTE) and Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC)

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Design Rights

Related Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology

Electrical and Computer Technology

Related Offices

Boston, MA

London

Originally printed in Computer Law Review International. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm's clients.

Related Insights

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Charitable

Bridges From School to Work Gala 2026

June 22, 2026

Washington, DC

Charitable

Banding Together 2026

June 18, 2026

Washington, DC

Lecture

Munich Licensing Summer Course 2026

June 18-19, 2026

Munich

Conference

IPBC Global 2026

June 15-17, 2026

San Diego

Conference

2026 Copyright Society Annual Meeting

June 14-16, 2026

Louisville

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP