Patent Test Under Supreme Court ScrutinyPatent Test Under Supreme Court Scrutiny

U.S. Supreme Court justices appear to be taking a skeptical view of lower court decisions that have protected patented products from claims that the inventions were "obvious" and thus not worthy of legal protection.

In a case that could have broad implications for the tech industry, a brake manufacturer who was sued for patent infringement is appealing a federal court's ruling that it failed to show that the plaintiff's invention would have been obvious to someone of reasonable skill.

In arguments before the Supreme Court last week, Justice Antonin Scalia went so far as to ask if it "made any sense to presume that patents are valid which have been issued under an erroneous test for the past 20 years."

Whether an invention is deemed obvious has hinged on whether the inventor encountered "teaching, suggestion, or motivation" in developing the product. "I just don't know what is meant by the term motivation," said Justice Stephen Breyer, despite the fact that he said he had read the federal court's decision "15 or 20 times now."

Most major tech vendors would like to see the test done away with, making it easier for them to fend off what they see as specious patent infringement lawsuits. Microsoft, IBM, and Cisco Systems are among the tech companies that submitted briefs to the Supreme Court supporting the defendant, KSR International, against rival Teleflex.

However, it's too early for the tech industry to count on a victory. At least one justice implied that he thinks the existing standards are needed to ensure that innovators are rewarded for their efforts. "In hindsight, everybody says, 'I could have thought of that,'" said Chief Justice John Roberts.

The court is expected to render a decision in July.