<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>eLegal Canton &#187; Amazon</title>
	<atom:link href="http://canton.elegal.ca/tag/amazon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://canton.elegal.ca</link>
	<description>eLegal Canton: technology law blog by a Canadian information technology and intellectual property law lawyer and trade-mark agent dealing with issues including software, copyright, privacy, the Internet, electronic commerce, computers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:48:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>European Patent Office says Amazon &#8220;one-click&#8221; too obvious to patent</title>
		<link>http://canton.elegal.ca/2011/07/08/european-patent-office-says-amazon-one-click-too-obvious-to-patent/</link>
		<comments>http://canton.elegal.ca/2011/07/08/european-patent-office-says-amazon-one-click-too-obvious-to-patent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Canton</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amazon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[one-click]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://canton.elegal.ca/?p=2599</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OUT-LAW news, a publication of the Pinsent Masons law firm, reports that the European Patent Office has rejected the Amazon &#8220;one-click&#8221; patent application.   The subject is a one-click shopping cart to reduce the amount of input one has to make on subsequent orders. The US courts narrowed the scope of Amazons&#8217;s original patent claims, but [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OUT-LAW news, a publication of the Pinsent Masons law firm, <a href="http://www.out-law.com/page-12059" target="_blank">reports </a>that the European Patent Office has rejected the Amazon &#8220;one-click&#8221; patent application.   The subject is a one-click shopping cart to reduce the amount of input one has to make on subsequent orders.</p>
<p>The US courts narrowed the scope of Amazons&#8217;s original patent claims, but ultimately allowed the patent.  In Canada, the Federal court <a href="http://canton.elegal.ca/2010/11/22/patent-ruling-signals-new-way-of-doing-business/" target="_blank">allowed the patent </a>last fall &#8211; but is has been appealed.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not a patent lawyer, so weighing in here with my thoughts might be dangerous, but IMHO, the European Patent Office has it right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://canton.elegal.ca/2011/07/08/european-patent-office-says-amazon-one-click-too-obvious-to-patent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amazon 1-click patent upheld</title>
		<link>http://canton.elegal.ca/2010/03/11/amazon-1-click-patent-upheld/</link>
		<comments>http://canton.elegal.ca/2010/03/11/amazon-1-click-patent-upheld/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Canton</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1 click]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amazon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Techdirt]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://canton.elegal.ca/?p=1823</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There has been a lot of controversy and debate over whether too many things are patentable, especially in the software and business method areas.  Many thought the Amazon 1-click patent, which was under review, should not be valid.  The USPTO has, however, confirmed the patent. Mike Masnick of Techdirt sums it up nicely, with links [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There has been a lot of controversy and debate over whether too many things are patentable, especially in the software and business method areas. </p>
<p>Many thought the Amazon 1-click patent, which was under review, should not be valid.  The USPTO has, however, confirmed the patent.</p>
<p>Mike Masnick of Techdirt sums it up nicely, with links to further detail.  <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20100310/1011108507.shtml#comments" target="_blank">Mike says</a>:</p>
<h1><em>US Patent Office Decides That One Click Really Is Patentable</em></h1>
<h3><em>from the wow dept</em></h3>
<p><em>Ladies and gentlemen, we now have confirmation that the USPTO is a joke. After years of back and forth, it has decided, once again, that </em><a href="http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2010/03/amazons_1-click_patent_confirmed_following_re-exam.html" target="_blank"><em>Amazon&#8217;s one-click patent is perfectly valid</em></a><em>. This, despite tons of prior art, and basic common sense. We were just wondering what was taking so </em><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100223/0249208265.shtml" target="_blank"><em>long</em></a><em> for the USPTO to reject the patent. But, of course, it seemed like the USPTO was willing to </em><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071204/002127.shtml" target="_blank"><em>go out of its way</em></a><em> to help keep this patent around. Of course, as some are pointing out, the end result of this patent surviving is that it may be used as </em><a href="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2010/03/amazon-one-click-patent-slides-through-reexamination.html" target="_blank"><em>example number one for patent reform</em></a><em>.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://canton.elegal.ca/2010/03/11/amazon-1-click-patent-upheld/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

