Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[villageidiot1]

I am working on a piece of software that is based on the structure of an existing commercial product.  I know what their structure is, and I want to base my design on that but make some changes.  My database on the back end will be from a different architecture (sql server, there's isn't on sql server).  And the front end is my own code built from scratch (also with new functionality - built using a different programming language).  If I use their field names and table structure (with some modifications) is this a patent infringement?

[rmr236]

(Hopefully this is correct post-Bilski)

35 USC 101 states the following:
"Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. "

The Courts have established a doctrine of judicial exceptions to 35 USC 101 as follows:
1) An abstract thought or idea (i.e. mathematical formulae)
2) Law of nature (You cannot patent gravity)
3) Natural phenomena (You cannot patent a rock you found in your backyard)

Discrete signals -- (Currently you cannot patent per se an electrical wave of some amplitude)

See  Gottschalk v. Benson 409 U.S. 63 (1972); Parker v. Flook 437 U.S. 584 (1978); and Diamond v. Diehr 50 U.S. 175 (1981);

I would look at Diamond v. Diehr and Gottschalk v. Benson here -- Since a database schema does not involve a physical transformation of data (Read: A database is simply a relational format between two systems and furthermore may constitute, inherently a mathematical formula)
HOWEVER, the mapping of database schema between programs IS patentable, but a schema itself is not.
Please see US 7313570; US 5974418; US 7472137; US 7200611. See class 700 subclass 100.
I will note US 7200611 as it does disclose a database schema, but only in the form of it involving a usage of the data to set up a TV program (i.e. the computer is using the database for something specific; so that there exists a true utility).

[CriterionD]

If you are worried about potential infringement, in case its not clear, you should also be concerned with copyright law here as well.  Copyright law generally doesn't offer the broader categorical type of protection that a patent can, but can be an issue here if you are ripping off chunks of source code.

In terms of patent infringement, the big question is, do any patents exist that protect the structure of this commercial product?  What patents are held by the manufacturer? From there, everything is easier. 

Along the lines of what is already pointed out, I am not aware that a database design cannot (hypothetically/theoretically) be patented.  I don't want to say anything too concrete since I know that there is some gray area as far as software patents are concerned.

[villageidiot1]

Thanks for the input.  I'll definately do more digging into the cases cited, and try to figure out what if any patents the other company holds.  In terms of code however, I'm not ripping off any.  The worst part about the other company's product is the code.  I don't know how familiar you are with software development, but basically they have a 2 tier (code on front end that the user sees, database on the back end that the user doesn't) application that I am planning on replacing with a 2 tier applicaiton.  The only thing that I would like to keep is the structure of their database (partially, I'm modifying that to fix some flaws and add enhancements).  The tables as they are defined are in an ok structure, and the tenants of good database design would keep them in about the same configuration.  That plus the fact that when I define an address table for example, it will have the same fields they used anyway (street, city, state, zip, etc).  Due to the fact that we are both trying to solve basically the same business problem, simply using decent database design would cause a huge amount of overlap anyway.

[JimIvey]

As for protecting databases (and other things of dubious eligibility such as "business method"), I find the question is not whether it can be patented but how it can be patented.  There is almost always a way to get through Section 101 for just about anything other than real abstract ideas, real natural phenomenon, etc. -- not technology that someone tried to cast as any of those exceptions.

Here's a quick test:  imagine someone tells you that patenting a database is like patenting gravity.

If your answer is something like mine, "Huh?  How so?", then there's a good chance you can get through Section 101 if you know what you're doing.

The line of cases that seem to be applied to things like databases (and data structures) is the "written matter" line of cases.  In essence, novelty can't lie in the artistically expressive (or simply written) parts of a thing.  The classic example is novel and non-obvious music or artwork stored on a CD.  The CD itself or the functional aspects of anything stored on it or the manner in which the stuff stored on it is created or used is not novel at all (in this hypothetical -- it could be, but isn't here).

Of course, like all exceptions, there are exceptions to the exception.  If "written matter" is functional (imagine a mark to which a use is to move a lever), it's cool.  Is a database functional?  Yes, of course it is.

Although, be prepared to include the relevant functional aspects of the database in the claims -- particularly inter-relationships and behavior driven by the database and, in particular, driven/enabled by these inter-relationships.

So, yes, patent protection can be had for a novel and non-obvious database. 

As to whether you might infringe, you have to do that same analysis you'd do for any patent -- read the claims and see if any of the claims describe what you do.  No cheating by dumbing the claim down to something ridiculous, like "hey, that's essentially claiming making a PB&J sandwich!"  The actual language of the claim matters.

Regards.