While the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to preserve the viability of business method patents, many lawyers are fuming that the Bilski ruling offers a dearth of practical guidance and is likely to trigger more litigation over what is patentable. The high court on The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday ruled that so-called business method patents are eligible for legal protection. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled against Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw, who sought to patent a method for hedging the impact that changes in the weather have on energy prices. The court said the application was too abstract, but left the door open for other "business method patents". Bilski and Warsaw had tried to patent their hedging method in 1997 but were denied by the US Patent and Trademark Office. They sued and the case has since made its way through the legal system. While the court upheld the ruling against Mr. Bilski and Mr. Warsaw, it said the machine or transformation test was not the only standard to consider when granting new patents. Instead, it ruled the hedging method was too abstract to warrant protection. The rejection of the test was also seen as a victory for companies seeking to patent new technologies.