"[T]he Federal Circuit said the patent application in question -- a method for reducing the risk of sudden changes in energy costs -- was not a machine and did not result in a transformation." (FTA)

The article seems to say the method is not a machine, which doesn't make much sense. Business method patents are still allowable if the process "is tied to a particular machine or apparatus."

See here for more background: http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/10/in-re-bilski.html

This is just all around good.

I'd say the chances that SCOTUS will review this are pretty good, and I wonder whether it will hold. The idea that a method can't be a machine is pretty tenuous.

It's certainly worthy of their time.

I remember hearing about "business method patents" a few years back when I was still working at Deloitte Consulting. They positioned it at this huge win and I didn't see how it was going to work. I'm really happy to see that it didn't.

The Value of an idea is in its application.

Patenting a good idea prevents others from applying that idea to create value.

This is a good ruling for those of us who want to create value, not just sit around coming up with ideas.