Canada Rejects Business Method Patents 68
"Canadian Patent Appeal Board Rules Against Business Method Patents," says a new post from Michael Geist; Lorien_the_first_one writes "Looks like the US courts could face some peer pressure," and supplies this excerpt: "[T]he panel delivered very strong language rejecting the mere possibility of business method patents under Canadian law. The panel noted that 'since patenting business methods would involve a radical departure from the traditional patent regime, and since the patentability of such methods is a highly contentious matter, clear and unequivocal legislation is required for business methods to be patentable.' ... In applying that analysis to the Amazon.com one-click patent, the panel concluded that 'concepts or rules for the more efficient conduct of online ordering, are methods of doing business. Even if these concepts or rules are novel, ingenious and useful, they are still unpatentable because they are business methods.'"
Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Not a win yet. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Oh Canada! (Score:3, Interesting)
The U.S. population uses metric. They just don't know it.
You would be surprised how many wheel nuts have an imperial outer dimension (3/4" comes to mind), and metric threads. Catepillar uses bolts with metric threads, and imperial heads for the U.S. market. That way, the same engine design can be used around the world. Just use the imperial headed bolts for the U.S. market, and the normal metric bolts everywhere else.
I think if you looked at the parts in the average automobile, you would be surprised at how many dimensions are in metric. Recently, I have noticed that the official "accurate" dimensions of construction materials are in metric. That 1/2" piece of plywood is actually 12 mm.