Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Scores Another Patent
theodp writes "Chalk up yet another patent for Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, this time for a Method and system for conducting a discussion relating to an item."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Yet again, another patent looks overly broad and poorly awarded. /., be prepared to pay license fees for use of this patent.
A method and system for conducting an electronic discussion relating to a topic. The discussion system of the present invention receives a selection of an item that is to be the topic of the discussion. The discussion system then receives comments relating to the selected item and generates a message that includes a description of the selected item and the received comments. The discussion system then sends the generated message to participants of the discussion. The discussion system receives from a participant who received the generated message additional comments that are to be added to the generated message. The discussion system sends the generated message along with received additional comments to the participants of the discussion.
That describes Slashdot. Where the Item to be discussed is a news story.
Here's a snippet from the abstract: The discussion system of the present invention receives a selection of an item that is to be the topic of the discussion. The discussion system then receives comments relating to the selected item and generates a message that includes a description of the selected item and the received comments. The discussion system then sends the generated message to participants of the discussion. It was filed in 1999. I'm sure there were 100s of sites before that doing this: letting users post comments on websites. Prior art would be abundant. Looking at all of these patents being granted by the USPTO, I get the impression that they (USPTO) have given up their responsibility of taking a critical look at the patent. They are letting the courts decide whether there was prior art or not. This begs the question: why bother with checking any prior art anyways? Why not just reduce the USPTO to a "copyright" sort of office, where anybody can file a patent for anything, and the courts decide? Obviously this patent system is not old Ben had in mind.
Step 1: This is simply yet another reason to not shop at Amazon. Show them that you don't belive in their system, don't shop there or at any of its affiliates. And make sure you tell everyone you know why you don't shop there.
Step 2: Start collecting anything that might be relevant prior art. Seeing as this was applied for in 1999 there has to be something. I personally am stunned that something this trivial is a patent, gotta love the USPTO.
Of course, if you were daft enough to provide source code for your software, evil patent lawyers might be able to see which patents you are infringing, but what sort of idealistic fool would do that?
The lawyers convinced us that filing the patent is the only way to prevent someone else from filing a patent, covering your technology, and then suing you, forcing you to PROVE to a court (always a chancy thing) that you had created prior art. And quite frankly every innovation we made to our online calendar showed up 3 months later in someone elses calendar. In fact we even found instances where people had literally cut and pasted our code, comments and all!
So we knew that there were unscroupulous bastards out there, willing to completely rip us off. So bearing that in mind, we agreed to file for patents, not so much to enforce them, but to protect ourselves from future suits. I agree, if the system was healthy and working, we wouldn't need to have done that, but the system is already full of sharks -- I don't blame people for getting shark repellant. Applying for the patent HAS to be done nowadays. Enforcing the patents is when I start to get mad. I know it's a fine line...
Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
Reading the summary would seem to imply otherwise. Certainly it would seem that if Slashdot were to post an article concerning E.g. the latest RedHat release, then it would fall under this patent. After all, the item under discussion (The latest version of RedHat) is for sale.
Go non-specific patent claims!
That is my entire point though. Something like this should not require a patent. Patenting message boards on the internet is akin to patenting walking as a method of travel for humans. It's an intrinsic function at this point.
Just because something can be patented does not mean it should.
It's a very sad statement on human nature and greed when something like this has to be done to protect companies from patent disuptes. Further, at some point the future, this patent could be abused.
Grimwell - old, cranky, mean, obsessive
Here's what the patent office said when I asked 'em about these.. is this an automated msg? lol. Ok I've got calculus3 now...late
From: USPTOInfo@uspto.gov
Date: Wed Feb 26, 2003 8:40:16 AM America/Phoenix
To: xxxxxx
Subject: RE: Patents [T20030226003P]
Dear : xxxxxxxx
A patent for an invention is a grant of property rights by the Government through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
The patent grant excludes others from making, using, or selling the invention. A utility or plant patent in force on June 8, 1995, is subject to either the 17 year term from grant or the 20 year term from earliest effective U.S. filing date, whichever is longer. A design patent term is 14 years from patent grant. The right conferred by the patent grant extends throughout the United States. The terms "Patent Pending" and "Patent Applied For" are used to inform the public that an application for a patent has been filed. Patent protection does not start until the actual grant of a patent. Marking of an article as patented, when it is not, is illegal and subject to penalty.
A patent cannot be obtained on a mere idea or suggestion. Patent applications are examined for both technical and legal merit. Prior to filing a patent application, a search of existing patents can be conducted at the USPTO Patent Search Room or at a Patent and Trademark Depository Library in your area.
For additional information on patents, you may visit the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/web/menu/pats.html.
General Information Services Division (GISD) provides customers with a wide variety of information and documents pertaining to patents and trademarks. GISD also answers technical questions regarding the electronic business systems available on the USPTO web site. You may contact GISD at 800 786-9199 or 703 308-4357.
I think this patent is a little broader than that. A cursory read found this passage
Surely==========
Error in module creativity.dll : Unable to create witty comment.
Abort / Retry / Ignore ?
And given that we haven't seen Amazon moving to enforce any of the very basic patents they have been accumulating, I'd guess that these are defensive patents.
They licensed one-click to Apple.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
If we must be forced by our government to accept software patents, should they not be appropriate for the environment they live in? The world of computing moves much faster than the ordinary world.
The life of a software patent should be good only for 1 year, then the method falls into public domain as it is likely becoming obsolete.
Z. http://www.play.net Your games, my job. C'est la vie!
Yeah, but prior art doesn't count for crap. If you read the patent information, they give it a broad definition but a range of extremely narrow specifics. Basically no one has done exactly what they have said. So the Patent Office accepts it, figuring if they screwed up, the courts can fix it. But the courts won't. You can't sue because you think a patent is wrong. You can only take it to court when they try to impose licensing fees. Fat chance you or I can go up against Amazon (or really will ever have cause too). And those who can have routinely just paid the fees (Apple for once click shopping for one). Hell, it's just creative accounting for them. They patent shit and pay each other.
And with time, the "prior art" is dilluted. Will google have caches of everything ever? Will courts really believe that HTML file and screen shot of the product discussion at SmallCompShop.com from 1996 is legit? Afterall, this is the great visionary Bezos. How could some amateur come up with such a revolutionary idea?
"When it rains, it pours." --Morton's Salt
If only the USPTO could reach the high standards you set for /. readers...
Sadly, Atleast USPTO workers can read/interpret patent applications...
If you're going to mod me down for not being funny, make sure you mod me down (-1: Ha-Ha-Funny) and not (-1: Ironic-Funny)
(NOTE: While the parent's post was funny and in good fun, I think it needs to be mentioned that while USPTO workers are stupid, we should be chagrined for not even achieving USPTO worker's level of stupidity. Hence, my sad joke, depressing irony, and attempt to win you over with a sad joke (second paragraph))
Oh yeah, we're fucked... Know any good jokes?
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce