Slashdot Mirror
Amazon & Barnes and Noble Settle One-Click Dispute
rtphokie writes: "C|Net is reporting that Amazon.com and Barnes&Noble.com have settled the over 2 year old lawsuit over the expedited ordering process known as '1-Click' ordering on Amazon's site and 'Express Checkout' on Barnes and Noble's. Details of the settlement are (of course) unavailable."
The outcome of the settlement is most certainly very important. If Barnes & Noble licenses Amazons technology or if Barnes & Noble have paid some amount of money, lots and lots of other websites can expect legal action from Amazon. After all, there are tons of sites which use the 1-click technology.
defiantly, being that 1-click is so advanced needing only half of the resources of 2-click. the whole thing is probably a buisness move, if amazon.com can slow down sales on barnes&nobles...they might as well give it a shot. Who knows it might be cheaper to litigate than advertise. Plus then theres all this free press like we're giving here.
http://omgwtfmedia.blogspot.com/
Amazon Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos responded to the criticism by calling for patent reform and by sponsoring an organization that investigated dubious patent claims.
Does this mean that Amazon really does not want to patent this process? They had to do it only because, if they don't someone else will do and Amazon have to battle them in court?
It is sad indeed that the system has to encourage such wasteful actions
yAthum UrE yAvarum kELir All the places are our place, everybody is our kin. (A Tamil Poet - 2000 years ago)
And I'm still buying their damn books...
It is not that software patents are bad or good. It is not even required that they be fully litigated.
But, few software patents truly deserve that kind of protection.
Years ago someone filed a patent for a new novel idea he had for cleaning the manure from the cow barns. He unleashed a torrent of water and away the filth went.
The patent was denied. Why? Because many years before Spartacus or Hercules did the same thing by diverting the flow of a local stream. It was not a novel or unique idea. It worked back then. It worked now.
The same is true with the one-click patent.
How many years ago do you think the farmer came into town, dropped by the general store, grabbed a bag of rice and gave the shopkeeper a high sign as he left? Is that not "one click"? Sounds like it to me. And, that was a long time ago.
Reducing the number of steps required to complete a task is not a novel or unique idea. Should we grant a patent to the 5-step guy? And, then the 4-step guy? And, then the 3-step guy?
It is really too bad that more patents are not fully litigated. It might remove most of them from the books.
Hey. I am all for protections of intellectual property. But, they should be ligitimate patents. And, despite the claims, very few new or novel ideas actually are developed in software. Almost all are simply variations on a theme. And, the problem with most software patent applications is that they fail to fully disclose the pre-existing work that has been around for years. And, yes, the failure to so disclose is one reason for disqualification of a patent.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)
B&N sounds all noble, until you realize that it was B&N that sued Amazon first, over Amazon calling themselves "the world's largest bookstore". How's that for a trivial lawsuit?
All along, Amazon was just getting some payback for that. It was certainly never about principles.
I would be interested in discovering exactly how they settled this.
One wonders if there shouldn't be a law REQUIRING public disclosure of any settlement for any patent related suit. After all, patents were once ostensibly about stimulating general progress and the public interest, so it's a public interest matter.
Tweet, tweet.
I used to buy a lot of books from you. If you check your records, you'll find just how much money I used to spend at your site and it was not an insignifigant amount. I liked the idea of an online bookstore and considered it a privilige to buy from you because you represented the new and innovative idea of buying off the web.
Your 1 click lawsuit exposed you as just another greedy business. I quit buying from your website and started telling all my friends not to buy from you because of your idiotic lawsuit. I also started telling all my friends not to buy from Amazon because of this lawsuit. Your settlement isn't going to settle my own beef against you. And I'll still give nasty replies every time you send me an e-mail trying to get me back.
And besides, there's no reason to go back. After all is said and done, I realized you did me a favor. I now buy all my books from your competitor. Now I have a Reader's Advantage card that not only gives me a discount at all B&N stores and website. Even better, this card gives me discounts at all B&N's affiliated bookstores such as B. Dalton and Scribners. To add icing to the cake I have a B&N credit card that gives me credits for B&N books every time use it. Why go back to Amazon?
I am glad you haven't gone out of business though. I like your website's organization better than B&N's. And I use it regularly to look up book information. Then I go over to the B&N website and make my purchases there.