Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canada's Federal Court of Appeal To Rule On Business Methods

Posted by Soulskill on from the must-need-a-distraction-from-the-maple-leafs dept.

ciaran_o_riordan writes "After last month's unfortunate ruling by Canada's Federal Court that Amazon's 1-click shopping idea could be patented, the Commissioner of Patents and the Attorney General of Canada have filed notice (PDF) to Amazon.com, Inc. (respondent) that an 'appeal will be heard by the [Federal Court of Appeal] at a time and place fixed by the Judicial Administrator,' probably Ottawa. This case, called Canada's Bilski, has been in the works since Amazon filed their patent application all the way back in 1998. Just like Bilski, the object of this case is what subject matter is and isn't patentable — a question which will create crucial case law, making participation in this case important. Anyone looking for more background, particularly those interested in helping to prepare an amicus brief for this case, is welcome at ESP's wiki page."

2 of 34 comments (clear)

  1. It's just so broken... by PerformanceDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Software and business methods should not be patentable - if for no other reason that most software patents are written by lawyers and therefore incomprehensible. Time and time again we are required in software contracts to warrant that we do not infringe on third party rights including patents. It is an impossible warranty to give as it is impossible to know if you do. There are so many software patents granted in so many esoteric minute little areas that for any remotely complex software you could spend a lifetime searching and trying to figure out if you did infringe on someone's patent. And the odds are very high that somehow you do. So you sign the contract knowing full well that you most likely are in breach, but the odds of you getting sued are sufficiently low to take the risk. How software and business method patents could possibly encourage innovation is beyond me.

    --
    Meus subcriptio est nocens Latin quoniam bardus populus reputo is sanus callidus
  2. why the editorial? by numbscholar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not trying to be a troll or anything, honestly I'm new to Slashdot, but why would they report a court ruling as "unfortunate"? I honestly don't know enough about the issue yet to have an informed opinion, but it seems the poster or Slashdot wants for me to have the preconception that this is not a good thing.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.