<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Software Patents in Canada &#8211; The Position of the Courts (1)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.myitlawyer.com/2009/canada-software-patents/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.myitlawyer.com/2009/canada-software-patents/</link>
	<description>Your IT Law Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:37:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Canada Software Patents - What Does MOPOP Say? &#124; myITLawyer</title>
		<link>http://www.myitlawyer.com/2009/canada-software-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>Canada Software Patents - What Does MOPOP Say? &#124; myITLawyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 19:48:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.myitlawyer.com/?p=124#comment-42</guid>
		<description>[...] MOPOP guidelines themselves seem to be very consistent with the case law and were updated before the more recent liberal decisions taken by [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] MOPOP guidelines themselves seem to be very consistent with the case law and were updated before the more recent liberal decisions taken by [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Software Patents in Canada - Changing Position of CIPO (3) &#124; myITLawyer</title>
		<link>http://www.myitlawyer.com/2009/canada-software-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>Software Patents in Canada - Changing Position of CIPO (3) &#124; myITLawyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:45:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.myitlawyer.com/?p=124#comment-35</guid>
		<description>[...] Office Practice (MOPOP) which is used as a guideline for examiners and applicants. Though the courts opinion regarding software patents does not signal in its favour, CIPO has made a number of recent [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Office Practice (MOPOP) which is used as a guideline for examiners and applicants. Though the courts opinion regarding software patents does not signal in its favour, CIPO has made a number of recent [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Software Patents in Canada - The Position of the Courts (2) &#124; myITLawyer</title>
		<link>http://www.myitlawyer.com/2009/canada-software-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Software Patents in Canada - The Position of the Courts (2) &#124; myITLawyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 14:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.myitlawyer.com/?p=124#comment-34</guid>
		<description>[...] Extra     &#171; Previous Post [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Extra     &laquo; Previous Post [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
