Talk:AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc.

Outdated in 2015
This article is outdated because of subsequent Supreme Court decisions (Bilski, Alice) that pretty much relegate it to the dust bin. They are not addressed in the article.

The article also fawns on the opinion, which is not consistent with its present low status.

Would someone like to do a comprehensive edit, pointing out that you cannot have a patent any more on a conventional implementation of the idea that the logical product of p and q is 1 if and only if both p and q = 1?

PraeceptorIP (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * In the Impact section, the first two paragraphs are outdated and now incorrect. The third paragraph states the present situation. If nobody expresses any problem, in a few weeks I will delete the first two paragraphs and leave only the third. PraeceptorIP (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612113612/http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5333184/description.html to http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5333184/description.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120310145411/http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/149/149.F3d.1368.96-1327.html to http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/149/149.F3d.1368.96-1327.html
 * Added tag to http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/5333184
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120511015343/http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/172/172.F3d.1352.98-1338.html to https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/172/172.F3d.1352.98-1338.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091007214554/http://www.computerlaw.com.au/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=wcl:papers:bmeth to http://www.computerlaw.com.au/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=wcl:papers:bmeth#current_patent_office_practice_compared_to_the_prevailing_law

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5333184
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101023044726/http://www.excel.com/ to http://www.excel.com/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.computerlaw.com.au/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=wcl%3Apapers%3Abmeth

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:19, 24 June 2017 (UTC)