Software patents, again

After reading Jonathan Schwartz's blog entry defending software patents (he is the COO of Sun), I decided to check and see what exactly was patentable in Canada. In particular, whether software is patentable.

So, from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office website, a description of what is patentable in Canada:

A patent is granted only for the physical embodiment of an idea—e.g., the description of a plausible door lock—or for a process that produces something saleable or tangible. You cannot patent a scientific principle, an abstract theorem, an idea, a method of doing business, a computer program, or a medical treatment.

I am pleased to see computer program specifically listed under things that cannot be patented.

Another nice thing about Canadian patents is that there is a possibility of applying for a compulsory licence to remedy patent abuse:

Compulsory licences may be granted to remedy what is called "abuse of patent rights." Such abuse can be considered only three years after grant. Hindering trade and industry is considered as an abuse. Abuse situations include:

• not meeting demand in Canada;
• hindering trade or industry in Canada by refusing to grant a licence (if such a licence is in the public interest), or by attaching unreasonable conditions to such a licence;
• using a process patent to unfairly prejudice production of a non-patented product, or allowing the patent on such a product to unfairly prejudice its manufacture, use or sale.

This probably means (IANAL) that things like the Eolas plugin patent problem which Mircosoft had would not have been an issue here. But then again, all that I know of the Eolas - Microsoft thing can be summed up thusly: "Eolas has a patent related to browser plugins; Microsoft makes a browser which support plugins; Eolas wants licence fees."