【正文】 are called business methods. received one for its “oneclick” online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.在過(guò)去的十年中，成千上萬(wàn)的商業(yè)方法被授予了專(zhuān)利權(quán)。亞馬遜網(wǎng)站獲得的專(zhuān)利是在線“單擊”付費(fèi)系統(tǒng)。美林公司的資產(chǎn)分配方案得到了法律保護(hù)。有個(gè)發(fā)明者的提箱技巧也獲得了專(zhuān)利。Now the nation’s top patent court appears pletely ready to scale back on businessmethod patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectualproperty lawyers abuzz, the . Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of businessmethod patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known, is “a very big deal,” says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of Law. It “has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents.”現(xiàn)在，該國(guó)最高專(zhuān)利法院似乎完全準(zhǔn)備好要縮減商業(yè)方法專(zhuān)利，因?yàn)樯虡I(yè)方法專(zhuān)利自從十年前第一次批準(zhǔn)授予以來(lái)一直有爭(zhēng)議。在一項(xiàng)使得知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)律師們議論紛紛的提議中，美國(guó)聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院聲稱(chēng)它將利用某個(gè)具體案件來(lái)對(duì)商業(yè)方法專(zhuān)利進(jìn)行廣泛的復(fù)審。密蘇里大學(xué)法學(xué)院Dennis D. Crouch說(shuō)，“正如人們所知道的那樣，Bilski案例是一件非常大的事情”它可能將消除整個(gè)專(zhuān)利類(lèi)別”。Curbs on businessmethod claims would be a dramatic aboutface, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the socalled State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutualfund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in businessmethod patent filings, initially by emerging Internet panies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established panies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 businessmethod patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment firms armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.對(duì)于商業(yè)方法訴求的限制是個(gè)戲劇性的徹底變化，因?yàn)檎锹?lián)邦巡回法院自己引進(jìn)了這種專(zhuān)利。那是在1998年，對(duì)于所謂的美國(guó)道富銀行的案件中，聯(lián)邦巡回法院做出了判決，批準(zhǔn)了籌集共同基金資產(chǎn)的方法具有專(zhuān)利權(quán)。這一裁決使得商業(yè)方法專(zhuān)利文件以幾何數(shù)級(jí)增加，起初只是一些新興的網(wǎng)絡(luò)公司對(duì)于某些特定類(lèi)型的在線交易系統(tǒng)試圖爭(zhēng)取獨(dú)家專(zhuān)有權(quán)。后來(lái)，更多的公司競(jìng)相添加這樣的專(zhuān)利權(quán)，希望這樣一個(gè)防御性的行為可以先下手為強(qiáng)。2005年，IBM公司在一份法院報(bào)告中聲稱(chēng)：盡管懷疑這種專(zhuān)利授權(quán)的法律基礎(chǔ)，但它已經(jīng)申請(qǐng)了300多份商業(yè)方法專(zhuān)利。同樣，當(dāng)一些華爾街投資公司出席某些反對(duì)其金融產(chǎn)品的法庭案件時(shí)，他們會(huì)給其各類(lèi)金融產(chǎn)品申請(qǐng)專(zhuān)利來(lái)作為自己的維權(quán)武器。The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court’s judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should “reconsider” its State Street Bank ruling.前面提到的Bilski案例牽扯到一份已申請(qǐng)的方法專(zhuān)利，即關(guān)于能源市場(chǎng)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)規(guī)避方法（注：也可譯為“套期保值或?qū)_風(fēng)險(xiǎn)”）。上訴法院罕見(jiàn)地裁定，該案件將不由三位法官聽(tīng)審，而是由全部十二名法官共同進(jìn)行。另外，上訴法院還宣布，它想探討的另一件事情是是否應(yīng)該“重審”道富銀行的裁決。The Federal Circuit’s action es in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the Supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for “inventions” that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are “reacting to the antipatent trend at the Supreme Court,” says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.聯(lián)邦巡回法院的這一裁決效仿了最高法院。最高法院最近做出了一系列的判決，縮小了專(zhuān)利持有者的受保范圍。例如，去年四月，法官們認(rèn)定太多的專(zhuān)利授予了一些顯而易見(jiàn)的“發(fā)明”。喬治華盛頓大學(xué)法律學(xué)院的專(zhuān)利法律師Harold C. Wegner教授表示，“聯(lián)邦巡回法院的法官們正在對(duì)最高法院的反專(zhuān)利動(dòng)態(tài)做出反應(yīng)”。26. Businessmethod patents have recently aroused concern because of __________.A. their limited value to business. 商業(yè)價(jià)值有限。B. their connection with asset allocation. 它們與資產(chǎn)配置關(guān)聯(lián)。C. the possible restriction on their granting. 批準(zhǔn)可能受到限制。D. the controversy over their authorization. 對(duì)于專(zhuān)利授權(quán)有爭(zhēng)議。正確答案：C. the possible restriction on their granting【分析】：題目問(wèn)題是：商業(yè)專(zhuān)利方法在最近引起關(guān)注的原因是是什么?本題關(guān)鍵詞為Businessmethod patents，可以定位于第二段。第一段說(shuō)：“過(guò)去10年商業(yè)方法授予了成千上萬(wàn)的專(zhuān)利”；第二段說(shuō)，“國(guó)家最高專(zhuān)利法庭準(zhǔn)備對(duì)商業(yè)模式專(zhuān)利進(jìn)行縮減，這件事引起了廣