Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/09pdf/08-964.pdf
Page Number: 61

Cite as:  561 U. S. ____ (2010) 

41 

STEVENS, J., concurring in judgment 

vary by the type of thing being patented.46  And the func-
tional  case  that  patents  promote  progress  generally  is 
stronger  for  subject  matter  that  has  “historically  been 
eligible to receive the protection of our patent laws,” Diehr, 
450 U. S., at 184, than for methods of doing business.

Many  have  expressed  serious  doubts  about  whether 
patents are necessary to encourage business innovation.47 
Despite  the  fact  that  we  have  long  assumed  business
methods could not be patented, it has been remarked that 
“the chief business of the American people, is business.”48 
Federal  Express  developed  an  overnight  delivery  service 
and  a  variety  of  specific  methods  (including  shipping
through a central hub and online package tracking) with-
out a patent.  Although counterfactuals are a dubious form 
of  analysis,  I  find  it  hard  to  believe  that  many  of  our  en-
trepreneurs  forwent  business  innovation  because  they 
could not claim a patent on their new methods.

“[C]ompanies have ample incentives to develop business 
methods  even  without  patent  protection,  because  the 
competitive  marketplace  rewards  companies  that  use
more efficient business methods.”  Burk & Lemley 1618.49 
Innovators  often  capture  advantages  from  new  business 
methods  notwithstanding  the  risk  of  others  copying  their
innovation.    Some  business  methods  occur  in  secret  and 

—————— 

46 See,  e.g.,  Burk  &  Lemley,  Policy  Levers  in  Patent  Law,  89  Va.

L. Rev. 1575, 1577–1589 (2003) (hereinafter Burk & Lemley). 

47 See,  e.g.,  Burk  &  Lemley  1618;  Carrier,  Unraveling  the  Patent-
Antitrust  Paradox,  150  U. Pa.  L. Rev.  761,  826  (2002)  (hereinafter 
Carrier);  Dreyfuss,  Are  Business  Methods  Patents  Bad  for  Business?
16  Santa  Clara  Computer  &  High  Tech.  L. J.  263,  274–277  (2000)
(hereinafter Dreyfuss); Posner, The Law and Economics of Intellectual
Property, 131 Daedalus 5 (Spring 2002). 

48 C.  Coolidge,  The  Press  Under  a  Free  Government,  in  Foundations

of the Republic: Speeches and Addresses 187 (1926). 

49 See  also  Pollack  75–76  (“Since  business  methods  are  ‘useful’  when 
they  directly  earn  revenue,  they  are  inherently  unlikely  to  be  under-
produced”).