Connect with us

Blockchain

USPTO Director Proposes New Patent Eligibility Guidance

Published

on

The test for patentable subject matter under Section 101 lies at the heart of patent system. However, very little guidance is provided in the actual statutory language. It comes as no surprise that the “seemingly’ simple provision of patent eligible subject matter has caused a great deal of confusion among inventors, patent attorneys, district court judges, and even the Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.

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.

35 U.S.C. § 101. The Supreme Court’s attempt to limit the scope of patentable subject matter by establishing three specific exceptions, laws of nature, physical phenomena, and abstract ideas, has created significant uncertainty for patent practitioners and examiners.

The USPTO has issued several guidelines in the past for determining patent-eligible subject matter to address such uncertainties. However, the examiners are still left with conflating aspects of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102, 103, and 112 with the § 101 analysis and expanding the “inventive concept” requirement. Recognizing the same, the USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu, recently proposed a change to how USPTO examiners determine whether a claimed invention satisfies the patent eligibility requirements of 35 USC § 101. On September 24, 2018, at the Intellectual Property Owners Association’s annual meeting, Director Iancu acknowledged that there is a growing consensus to promptly address the issue of patent eligibility subject matter. The premise of Director Iancu’s position is that there should be a strong line between “categories of invention on one hand” and “conditions for patentability on the other.” He stressed on the problems arising from the confusion in distinguishing between categories of invention under § 101 and conditions for patentability under §§ 102, 103, and 112:

“How can a claim be novel enough to pass 102 and nonobvious enough to pass 103, yet lack an ‘inventive concept’ and therefore fail 101? Or, how can a claim be concrete enough so that one of skill in the art can make it without undue experimentation, and pass 112, yet abstract enough to fail 101? How can something concrete be abstract?”

Director Iancu emphasized that § 101 is about subject matter, and that “it is meant to address categories of matter that are not ever eligible on their own, no matter how inventive or well-claimed they are.” He said that the Patent Office is considering revised guidance to help the examiners categorize the exceptions and on how to apply them. The following two clarifications to be addressed in the contemplated guidance, according to Director Iancu, “would help drive more predictability back into the analysis while remaining true to the case law that gave rise to these judicial exceptions in the first place”:

  • Categorizing the exceptions based on a synthesis of the case law to date, and
  • If a claim does recite a categorized exception, examiners would be instructed “to decide if it is “directed to” that exception by determining whether such exception is integrated into a practical application.”

Commenting on the judicial exceptions, Director Iancu noted that they should cover “only those claims that the Supreme Court has said remain outside the categories of patent protection, despite being novel, nonobvious, and well-disclosed.” The Supreme Court provided “basic tools of scientific and technological work” to categorize inventions that cannot be patented even where the applicant demonstrates full compliance with Sections 102, 103 and 112. Director Iancu defined “basic tools of scientific and technological work” as following

  • pure discoveries of nature, such as gravity, electromagnetism, DNA, etc.—all natural and before human intervention; (citing Myriad)
  • fundamental mathematics like calculus, geometry, or arithmetic per se; (citing Benson)
  • basic “methods of organizing human activity,” such as fundamental economic practices like market hedging and escrow transactions;” (citing Bilski and Alice) and
  • pure mental processes such as forming a judgment or observation, explaining that “something performed solely in the human mind can be thought of as abstract no matter how it is claimed.”

Director Iancu highlighted the proposed guidelines would be mostly directed to eligibility issues surrounding “abstract ideas,” and in particular guiding the examiners to determine when a claim recites or is “directed to” an abstract idea. He further revealed that the proposed PTO guidance would synthesize “abstract ideas” as falling into the following three categories*:

  1. Mathematical concepts like mathematical relationships, formulas, and calculations
  2. Certain methods of organizing human interactions, such as fundamental economic practices commercial and legal interactions; managing relationships or interactions between people; and advertising, marketing, and sales activities
  3. Mental processes, which are concepts performed in the human mind, such as forming an observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion.

To “resolve a significant number of cases currently confounding our system,” Director Iancu said that the proposed guidance would highlight a new approach in which

“we would first look to see if the claims are within the four statutory categories: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter…If statutory, we would then check to see if the claims recite matter within one of the judicial exceptions…If the claims at issue do not recite subject matter falling into one of these categories, then the 101 analysis is essentially concluded and the claim is eligible.”

If the claims do contain subject matter recited in one of the excluded categories, more analysis will be done as instructed by the Supreme Court to decide whether the claims are “directed to” those categories. For that purpose, Director Iancu stated that “we must first understand what the line is that the court wants us to draw to decide whether the claim is “directed to” an excluded category or not. The proposed new guidance would explain that Supreme Court jurisprudence taken together effectively allows claims that include otherwise excluded matter as long as that matter is integrated into a practical application. The line, in other words, delineates mere principles, on one hand, from practical applications of such principles, on the other.”

Citing to Supreme Court decisions, Director Iancu highlighted that the court has repeatedly told us “an application of a law of nature or mathematical formula to a known structure or process may well be deserving of patent protection,” [in Diamond v. Diehr] and that “applications of such concepts to a new and useful end … remain eligible for patent protection” [in Mayo]. The proposed guidance would emphasize that the claim is not “directed to” the prohibited matter if the claim integrates the exception into a practical application. “In such cases, the claim passes 101 and the eligibility analysis would conclude. Otherwise, [the USPTO] would move to step 2 of Alice.

Commenting on one of the main distinguishing features of the proposed guidance from the step 2 of Alice, to ensure a “meaningful dividing line between 101 and 102/103 analysis,” Director Iancu highlighted that “the first step of [the proposed] analysis does not include questions about “conventionality”…it does not matter if the “integration” steps are arguably “conventional”; as long as the integration is into a practical application, then the 101 analysis is concluded.”

In sum, Director Iancu stated that the proposed guidance for Section 101 will provide significant clarity by addressing step 1 of Alice and explaining “that eligibility rejections are to be applied only to claims that recite subject matter within the defined categories of judicial exceptions. And even then, a rejection would only be applied if the claim does not integrate the recited exception into a practical application.” The proposed guidance contemplates that conflating aspects of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102, 103, and 112 with the § 101 analysis would be minimized by going through the analysis in the figure below:

In closing remarks, Director Iancu restated the need for simplification and calls for other authorities to “join in helping us get out of the rut, at least by keeping rejections in their lane and by clearly categorizing the subject matter of any exception.” He also noted that if the revised new guidance were to be issued, it may take some time before it is finalized.

Source: https://www.bioloquitur.com/uspto-director-proposes-new-patent-eligibility-guidance/

Blockchain

Solana, Polkadot, Algorand: What is the Bitcoin effect on these altcoins

Published

on

With the market trading in red today pretty much all coins including Bitcoin and Ethereum are falling. However, there are some coins that made excellent gains in the last 2 months which are now facing huge price falls as well.

Which alts though?

Solana, Polkadot, and Algorand were three altcoins that successfully rallied between July and August. Polkadot rose from $12.34 all the way to $34.45 registering a 214.33% growth. Similar gains were observed for Algorand as the coin breached $2 and marked a 230.26% rise. 

The most gains were seen by Solana holders though mainly because the altcoin shot up 713.94%. An increase this high was the result of the NFT hype which took it up from $26.68 to $191.07

Solana’s 713% rise | Source: TradingView – AMBCrypto

In fact, Solana and Algorand even registered new all-time highs during this time period. But each of these coins is now observing significant price falls as well. 

In the last 24 hours ALGO fell by 15.26%, DOT came down by 14.37% and SOL lost 16.8% of its price as of press time.

A huge reason behind this fall is also their exhausted momentum since even after the September 7 fall, DOT and ALGO witnessed another price rise before they finally hit a slowdown.

Algorand’s 15.26% drop | Source: TradingView – AMBCrypto

Owing to this investors are possibly getting rid of their holdings in both spot and derivatives markets. Sell volumes at the time of this report have increased and liquidations rose to millions for all 3 altcoins. Since SOL gained the most, it lost the most as well and its liquidations touched $25 million.

Solana liquidations at $25 million | Source: Coinalyze – AMBCrypto

Can Bitcoin save them?

Well since Bitcoin’s price movement commands the market’s movement it is obvious that BTC needs to reduce losses first. But more importantly, these assets’ correlation to Bitcoin will determine how much they will be affected by BTC. Right now Algorand is at the lowest at 0.57, followed by Solana at 0.7, and at the highest is Polkadot (0.88)

However, surprisingly, investors are most positive about Algorand of all three hoping for a recovery soon.

Investor sentiment | Source: Santiment – AMBCrypto

Once Bitcoin and Ethereum change their movement, other coins would follow suit. And that’s when some recovery can be expected.

Where to Invest?

Subscribe to our newsletter

PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.

Click here to access.

Source: https://ambcrypto.com/solana-poladot-algorand-what-is-the-bitcoin-effect-on-these-altcoins

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Kraken Daily Market Report for September 19 2021

Published

on


Overview


  • Total spot trading volume at $598.4 million, the 30-day average is $1.36 billion.
  • Total futures notional at $223.4 million.
  • The most traded coins were, respectively, Bitcoin (-2.2%), Ethereum (-3.1%), Tether (0%), Solana (-9.9%), and Cosmos (+8.8%).
  • Cosmos continues its hot streak, up 8.8%. Also strong returns from OMG (+10%).

September 19, 2021 
 $598.4M traded across all markets today
 Crypto, EUR, USD, JPY, CAD, GBP, CHF, AUD 
BTC 
$47237. 
↓2.2% 
$159.9M
ETH 
$3328.3 
↓3.1% 
$112.5M
USDT 
$1.0001 
↓0.01% 
$66.5M
SOL 
$152.62 
↓9.9% 
$39.4M
ATOM 
$44.205 
↑8.8% 
$34.8M
ADA 
$2.2816 
↓3.7% 
$33.9M
DOT 
$33.828 
↓2.9% 
$28.0M
USDC 
$1.0 
↓0.01% 
$19.8M
ALGO 
$1.975 
↓4.8% 
$16.0M
XTZ 
$6.5085 
↑1.1% 
$16.0M
XRP 
$1.0480 
↓2.5% 
$11.6M
LINK 
$27.364 
↓3.3% 
$8.56M
DOGE 
$0.2329 
↓3.3% 
$7.51M
LTC 
$181.89 
↑0.24% 
$7.26M
OMG 
$9.6562 
↑10% 
$6.8M
KSM 
$400.45 
↓4.2% 
$6.65M
EOS 
$4.912 
↓9.9% 
$4.86M
CRV 
$3.0345 
↑5.8% 
$4.84M
BCH 
$610.63 
↓3.2% 
$4.79M
DYDX 
$14.288 
↓12% 
$4.55M
MATIC 
$1.3112 
↓4.1% 
$4.14M
XLM 
$0.3134 
↓2.7% 
$3.04M
MOVR 
$387.12 
↓2.1% 
$2.95M
MINA 
$5.38 
↑1.7% 
$2.88M
ZEC 
$133.55 
↓3.8% 
$2.77M
TRX 
$0.1037 
↓2.0% 
$2.4M
AAVE 
$339.02 
↓4.5% 
$2.29M
SC 
$0.0180 
↓5.1% 
$2.02M
XMR 
$260.10 
↓4.2% 
$1.99M
FLOW 
$20.114 
↓2.9% 
$1.93M
DAI 
$1.0002 
↑0.01% 
$1.85M
ANT 
$5.9664 
↓3.2% 
$1.76M
MLN 
$123.19 
↑2.4% 
$1.72M
SNX 
$12.82 
↑1.7% 
$1.47M
DASH 
$192.81 
↓3.6% 
$1.32M
NANO 
$5.5184 
↓0.9% 
$1.31M
OXT 
$0.3665 
↓2.7% 
$1.29M
ETC 
$55.316 
↓2.8% 
$1.26M
SRM 
$9.8570 
↓8.9% 
$1.23M
KAVA 
$6.0120 
↓4.3% 
$1.09M
CQT 
$1.193 
↓2.6% 
$907K
ICX 
$1.7976 
↓6.7% 
$837K
SDN 
$5.84 
↓2.7% 
$819K
KEEP 
$0.4473 
↓6.4% 
$809K
UNI 
$23.906 
↓2.3% 
$807K
WAVES 
$27.5 
↓5.1% 
$798K
KAR 
$9.941 
↓11% 
$790K
FIL 
$83.437 
↓1.0% 
$725K
YFI 
$32933. 
↓2.6% 
$649K
COMP 
$392.7 
↓2.1% 
$599K
QTUM 
$12.145 
↓3.3% 
$577K
OCEAN 
$0.7578 
↓5.7% 
$577K
SUSHI 
$12.017 
↓5.3% 
$513K
REN 
$0.8905 
↓5.9% 
$501K
GRT 
$0.8017 
↓3.4% 
$429K
RARI 
$19.69 
↓7.9% 
$406K
KNC 
$1.7345 
↓3.5% 
$339K
STORJ 
$1.3421 
↓3.9% 
$318K
PAXG 
$1763.7 
↓0.21% 
$305K
BAT 
$0.7403 
↓1.3% 
$269K
CTSI 
$0.6513 
↓3.6% 
$268K
AXS 
$63.35 
↓2.2% 
$245K
ENJ 
$1.5619 
↓4.9% 
$220K
LSK 
$3.6100 
↓0.6% 
$216K
ZRX 
$1.047 
↓5.4% 
$207K
EWT 
$10.199 
↓4.7% 
$197K
BAL 
$24.71 
↓3.9% 
$191K
MIR 
$3.6362 
↓3.0% 
$177K
CHZ 
$0.3165 
↓3.6% 
$156K
1INCH 
$2.9619 
↓4.3% 
$142K
GNO 
$265.44 
↓5.0% 
$141K
PERP 
$14.055 
↓5.7% 
$139K
MANA 
$0.7986 
↓2.8% 
$136K
BADGER 
$20.576 
↓8.8% 
$136K
OGN 
$1.0027 
↓5.0% 
$125K
MKR 
$2730.0 
↓2.9% 
$115K
INJ 
$10.950 
↑2.0% 
$99.1K
REP 
$25.857 
↓1.8% 
$95.5K
LPT 
$18.11 
↓4.2% 
$89.2K
ANKR 
$0.0947 
↓0.3% 
$76.3K
LRC 
$0.4531 
↓1.5% 
$71.4K
GHST 
$1.6867 
↓1.2% 
$56.2K
BAND 
$8.852 
↓4.2% 
$48.2K
SAND 
$0.7381 
↓4.7% 
$43.9K
TBTC 
$48240. 
↓3.4% 
$32.5K
REPV2 
$25.234 
↓3.7% 
$27.3K
BNT 
$3.923 
↓1.3% 
$15.5K
WBTC 
$47699. 
↓0.4% 
$12.3K



#####################. Trading Volume by Asset. ##########################################

Trading Volume by Asset


The figures below break down the trading volume of the largest, mid-size, and smallest assets. Cryptos are in purple, fiats are in blue. For each asset, the chart contains the daily trading volume in USD, and the percentage of the total trading volume. The percentages for fiats and cryptos are treated separately, so that they both add up to 100%.

Figure 1: Largest trading assets: trading volume (measured in USD) and its percentage of the total trading volume (September 20 2021)



Figure 2: Mid-size trading assets: (measured in USD) (September 20 2021)



###########. Daily Returns. #################################################

Daily Returns %


Figure 3: Returns over USD and XBT. Relative volume and return size is indicated by the size of the font. (September 20 2021)



###########. Disclaimer #################################################

The values generated in this report are from public market data distributed from Kraken WebSockets api. The total volumes and returns are calculated over the reporting day using UTC time.

PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.

Click here to access.

Source: https://blog.kraken.com/post/11070/kraken-daily-market-report-for-september-19-2021/

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Taker Protocol Raises $3M to Transform NFT Liquidity and Utilization

Published

on

New York, United States, 20th September, 2021,

Taker Protocol, a crypto liquidity protocol for NFTs, has raised $3 million from a number of reputable investors to build new financial primitives into the burgeoning NFT market.

The round was led by Electric Capital, with DCG, Ascentive Assets, Dragonfly Capital, Spartan Group, The LAO, Sfermion and Morningstar Ventures participating as well.  

Taker Protocol focuses on improving the liquidity available in the NFT market. Due to the unique non-fungible structure of NFTs, existing DeFi primitives are difficult to integrate into the market, resulting in significant issues in terms of overall liquidity. The value of an NFT is extremely volatile and often effectively becomes zero as no buyers can be found at any reasonable price. Furthermore, NFTs are difficult to use productively after purchase and often end up forgotten in the user’s wallet.

Taker Protocol aims to solve the worst of the liquidity issues. Allowing lenders and borrowers to liquidate and rent assets that aren’t cryptocurrencies creates new liquidity streams and opportunities. For Taker, these assets will include NFTs, financial papers, synthetic assets, and much more. 

The TKR token defines membership in the Taker DAO, which has several key functions in the system. In addition to setting loan-to-value rates and other parameters in the protocol, the DAO will also contribute in fairly appraising a particular NFT or NFT collection. This means that each asset supported by Taker will have a guaranteed fair floor price. In return, TKR holders will be able to obtain rewards and receive a portion of platform income. 

The funds received will help Taker launch the full version of the protocol across multiple chains, including Ethereum, Polygon, Solana, BSC and Near. The support of major stakeholders and participants in the NFT ecosystem will also help further development of the project.

Taker DAO contains many different Curator DAOs (Sub-DAOs), each sub-DAO will manage their own whitelist and a floor price for any NFT on their whitelist if the borrower defaults on the loan. We believe that it is best to mitigate the risks for our lenders by carefully selecting the NFT assets that our community desires and trusts the most. Aligning the interest of the DAOs with that of the lenders, we will mitigate the risk exposure for the lenders and optimize the profits for the DAOs. Moreover, each sub-DAO will have its own funds and can choose to focus exclusively on a specific type of NFT assets. For example, it could be artworks-only or Metaverse-only. 

Taker Co-Founder Angel Xu comments:

“We are absolutely thrilled to welcome so many well-established investment funds to the team. Their participation heralds an exciting new phase for the protocol as we seek to address persistent problems in the NFT lending market for the benefit of end-users. This investment will enable us to further optimize liquidation of NFT assets across multiple blockchains, removing the barriers to entry that prevent new players from entering the market.”

“Taker Protocol is using an innovative approach to solve the biggest problem in the NFT space — lack of liquidity. With Taker, we are one step closer to the world where anyone anywhere can use their NFT assets to take out a loan.” (Maria Shen, Partner at Electric Capital)

About Taker

NFT DeFi: Taker is the first protocol to provide liquidity to the NFT market through a DAO. It is a multi-strategy, cross-chain lending protocol for lenders and borrowers to liquidate and rent all kinds of crypto assets, including financial papers, synthetic assets, and more. Taker provides ensured liquidity via our lenderDao infrastructure and extensions that could be integrated into NFT marketplaces.

Contacts

PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.

Click here to access.

Source: https://www.crypto-news.net/taker-protocol-raises-3m-to-transform-nft-liquidity-and-utilization/

Continue Reading
Uncategorized5 days ago

Wicked Craniums are now Nifty Gateway!

Uncategorized5 days ago

Acorns Hires Former Amazon Executive as President, Hints at Crypto Options

Uncategorized4 days ago

Swissquote Confirms European Expansion Plan, Focusing on Crypto

Blockchain5 days ago

Biggest Crypto Adoption Rumours: Apple, Amazon, and Walmart

Blockchain4 days ago

Massive NFT and Token Giveaway from Polker as Staking is Announced!

Uncategorized5 days ago

Head of Australian Crypto Exchange Says Regulations Are Beneficial

Blockchain5 days ago

The Signal and the Noise

News5 days ago

Evaluating Credit Card Debt Relief Options

Uncategorized4 days ago

Bingbon Launches its Carbon Free and Afforestation Project

Uncategorized4 days ago

Nickelodeon All-Star Brawl will include DLC fighters post-launch

News4 days ago

Gods Unchained and Guild of Guardians Layer 2 Solution Immutable Raises $60 Million

Blockchain5 days ago

What’s Behind Elrond (EGLD) Daily Surges?

Blockchain5 days ago

Public.com Inks Deal with NFL Star to Advise on Financial Literacy Programs

Blockchain2 days ago

Over 40 days after Ethereum’s EIP-1559, here’s where it stands

Uncategorized5 days ago

This needs to happen before Peter Schiff will buy Bitcoin (BTC)

Blockchain4 days ago

Opensea NFT marketplace Accuses Senior Employee of Insider Trading

Blockchain4 days ago

Grab a spot in Tomi’s presale by bagging an NFT – 260+ ETH raised!

Blockchain5 days ago

Venture Firm Raises $350 Million to Double Down on Its Cryptocurrency Involvement

Blockchain4 days ago

Kanga Exchange Partners with Tenset for an Exclusive Public Sale of KNG Token

Blockchain3 days ago

Cardano Sees an Influx in Smart Contracts ! But There’s a Twist

Trending