Slashdot Mirror
eBay guilty Of Patent Infringement, Ordered To Pay
theodp writes "Remember that patent infringement lawsuit brought against eBay? A U.S. District Court jury just ordered the online auction house to pay $35 million for infringing on patents for programs and procedures to operate an Internet-based auction."
There's no way this won't be turned over on appeal. Ebay has enough PR clout that they can easily raise a real stink about this in the mainstream press.
Maybe this will prove to be the best thing that happened for patent law in recent history. It could lead to some actual productive reforms...
This space intentionally left blank.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
You can boycott Amazon.com all you want. You can make T-Shirts. Post on slashdot....whatever. But until you get a big company with lots of lawyers and money, fighting for what you want, it's never going to happen.
Now, E-bay will probably not want to do away with the entire software patent system (which is the right way to go, in my opinion), but unless you have someone to fight the battle, you're never going to win the war.
Maybe this looks like a job for:
Jury Nullification
I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
PR clout? Federal appeals court judges serve for life. Once appointed by the Prez and confirmed by the Senate, they can't be removed short of impeachment, which is pretty rare. Makes it hard to apply political pressure to them.
Reading back the original discussion is amazing how many posts were far off the mark and how few were right on the button. For one, I didn't see any among the dozens and dozens I read who even mentioned the "buy it now" aspect of the patent...
Nothing worse than incompetent jurors. The idea of someone being able to patent the processes of auctioning is just appalling. What these jurors need to get through their head is that if something exist in some other form it shouldn't be patentable. I care not for eBay but this is ridiculous.
-----
One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
From the Article:
"Woolston said he is 'walking on sunshine' over of the favorable verdict. The former technology expert for the CIA has prevailed in patent violation cases with other Internet companies before, including GoTo.com, now Overture Services. He enforced his patents with online car seller AutoTrader.com, which offers auctions as part of its service. He's also in the midst of a patent dispute with Priceline.com." [Emphasis mine]
When companies sue, lawyers profit. Looks like a profitable e-commerce business model now exists where the e-commerce business is sued for violating questionable patents. What we really need is for the US Supreme Court to overrule the previous ruling that business practices are patentable. This would ease the burden on the USPTO and quash these law suits.
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
The facts are very simple. Allowing patents on business processes was a stupid idea. The only beneficiaries are the folks who can file a submarine patent, watch someone else think of it too, and then after they've made the effort to develop the idea, sue them.
The $35M verdict is probably peanuts for EBay, but that doesn't lessen the wrongfulness. This is how you kill inventiveness and creativity: By allowing leeches such as this to win.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
Turns out this guy has a lawsuit against priceline as well.
Odds are none of these companies getting these ridiculous patents thought that someone might beat them to the punch!
If someone is gonna benefit and make mucho $$$ might as well be that little guy.
I'm suprised that the big ass companies haven't flip-flopped, "Software patents are a bad idea".
Oh yeah now they are, sure.
That decision is ludicrous. How about if I go and patent a machine with four wheels and an engine, never bother to test or use it and sue everybody for royalties. Why, oh why are we judged by a jury of our peers not smart enough to get out of jury duty? BTW I do answer the call when it comes [$15 a day woot!].
-- Some days you're the dog; some days you're the hydrant.
Buying a President is easier, I admit. Just give him a "campaign contribution". But so you get your favorite judge on the bench. So what? One they have that lifetime tenure, federal judges tend to quickly develop a nasty sense of independence.
Consider Richard Nixon. He managed to appoint no less than 4 justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. Not one of those justices voted in his favor when his most important case came in front of them.
If you have any actual evidence that Microsoft fixed any of its cases, let's see it. Otherwise, spare us your glib ignorance.