Slashdot Mirror
Online Auction Industry In A State Of Limbo
theodp writes "It seems the online auction industry is in a state of limbo after last week's ruling that eBay violated patents belonging to MercExchange. MercExchange said it will file an injunction against eBay to keep them from using the technology, eBay said it will file motions to overturn the verdict, and MercExchange is ultimately looking to sell its entire portfolio of auction-related patents. Names being bandied about as possible acquirers include Amazon, Yahoo and eBay itself. Whoever holds the patents may require other sites to pay them licensing royalties."
people hate lawyers?
Do me a favor and double it!
to suffer from selfish individuals bent on thwarting innovation of technologies.
- Whoever holds the patents may require other sites to pay them licensing royalties.
Going out on a limb with that one, huh? Yeah, I can't think of many reasons for a company to buy the patent portfolio of a company whose patents on a key Internet technology were just upheld in court. Besides pulling a SCO, that is.Can we just refer to this kind of manuover as "pulling a SCO" from now on?
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
How the heck do you patent doing something that's been done for generations just because it's on the internet. It'd be like patenting giving stock quotes over the phone. It really ticks me off to see all these companies with nothing real to offer humanity getting patents for using other peoples technology. If I were ebay, I'd try and kill this patent based on the shear obviousness of it.
Still, I can't help but wonder if the reason America is so patent crazy lately is to get a leg up on the rest of the world. I'm pretty sure large parts of Europe will be tricked/cajoled/forced into honoring this crap eventually, and I know Iraq will (whether they want to or not).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If they did, Paypal would end up the big winner in all of this, keeping all the profits, considering their history of taking people's money.
-Look lively. LOOK LIVELY!!! --Mr. Shmallow
What truly is non-obvious? The fact that this can be patented is truly ridiculous. I can't see how this is a case of patents protecting the economic goals of this country. In this case the patent produces the exact opposite of its original goal, it removes competition in the sector. Yet another reason to search for alternatives to our current IP system.
Photos.
MercExchange, which said it will file an injunction against eBay to keep them from using the fixed price technology MercExchange had patented in 1995.
Does this mean MercExchange patented By It Now?
If I'm reading this properly, then it just seems that Merc wants to:
1. Obtain all legal rights to online auctioning methods
2. Sell to large Fortune 500 company
3. Profit.
Which makes sense to me. It may be a slimy tactic, but that's business.
Vonal Declosion
Oh, and I also worry about stuff like this being enforced in the US. (I'm a US'ian) If we are more strict with our IP laws than other countries, then our companies' ability to compete on the international market could be hampered.
You aren't allowed to patent a business process (i.e. "the assembly line") and I don't understand why this should be any different when the internet, computers or software are concerned. Some software patents like compression algorithms and such are somewhat arguable but patents like "online auctioning" are just stupid...
Lame US patent law.
This might be an important case, if ebay decides to try and challenge the legitimacy of the patents. If they win, it could set a good precident. If they lose, it'll be a disaster. I hope thats what ebay does, allowing MercExchange to make money off these absurd patents will only encourage others. Oops, it appears that I have a patent for electronicly displaying letters and numbers...
Your system if fully and utterly screwed...proof offered (again) above. Canada, Australia and New Zealand will begin accepting immigration applications shortly.
This has nothing to do with auctions on the internet or the end of all auctions. It has to do with specific combination of FIXED PRICE SELLING and an INTEGRATED PAYMENT PROCESSOR.
So, IMHO, ebay just needs to remove the fixed price items and it's business as usuall.
How about patenting the concept of porting a way of auctioning things over the internet from IPV4 to IPV6?
Or bidding via a cell phone instead of a computer.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
because MercExchange was waiting for the right moment, theres no point suing when the companies using the patented ip when they are startups, not much of a payoff there...
I'm a rabbit startled by the headlights of life
This is why people hate the US Patent and Trademark Office.
I'm thinking more along the lines of businesses moving out as opposed to citizens. How about ebay moves its entire operations to Canada, or maybe Aus? We have decent webserver pricing, there's already ebay.ca, etc. Swap the domain name to a Canadian nameserver.
Such an incredibly stupid patent would have less chance of surviving Canadian court... not sure about Aus... but it seems that America is slowly poisoning its own economy. I mean, X years from now America will be so bogged down by bad patents and innovation-stifling technology/laws that it will be far behind the rest of the world in a technological sense.
Maybe that was offtopic, since mathematicians have a strange notion of "obvious". Thing is, you can't just say something is "obvious" because it's something we take for granted now. Nowadays, anybody who's studied elementary math takes as "obvious" that there's no largest possible integer. Perhaps if Cantor's proof to the contrary had been a little harder to understand...
The fact is, it's easy to say "Oh, anybody could have thought of that" after somebody has actually thought of it. But you don't actually know that. To have an intelligent opinion on the originality of an invention, you have to stop and compare it with other inventions, ones that got accepted as truely original. And ones that haven't.
I don't have an opinion on the patentability of online auctions. To have an educated opinion on this issue, I'd have to compare it with other similar ideas that other people have tried to patent. Of course, this is a free country, and you're entitled to have an opinion about anything you choose, whether you know what you're talking about or not. But until you take the trouble to have an educated opinion, you're the one who should screw off.
This has been going on since the eighties. Maybe not on the Internet, but definitely within private networks of cooperating organisations.
See my journal, I write things there
And thats that.
Arg, this is really frustrating! People use this [sarcasm]non-obvious[/sarcasm] concept all the time. In countless magazines, newspapers, etc. How silly would it be for Auto Trader to patent the concept of OBO (which is what we're talking about here) for paper media? And how much more absurd is it that now, any person who uses "$XXX OBO (Or Best Offer)" /online/ to sell their goods (let's say in a forum, where they are responsible for their choice) is liable for patent infringement.
This is cleary the same thing - The $XXX is the buy it now, the OBO is the, "otherwise start bidding".
In theory this affects everyone who wants to sell something online, not just the auction sites.
No, I think you are wrong. It is the lawyers. I am not talking about anyone in particular you know, or any one person, but the profession of lawyers. They created the environment where it is OK to file stupid lawsuits. What do they care, as long as they get paid.
Who do you think makes the laws? Lawyers. You can argue that they are drafted and passed by Congress or the Senate or the friggin PTA, but lawyers create and revise the laws. Everything has to be in correct legal terms. Everyone who has power has "legal council" who can manipulate the system. When you think of "scumbag" lawyers, it isn't just the ambulance chaser, it is also the divorce attorney who is trying to get his client all the money he can, or the defense attorney who gets his client off on a technicality when he was guilty. They manipulate the legal system to suit their own needs. All of them.
Our legal profession is a joke, and even if you aren't one of the bad guys, you have to play the bad guys' game. Now you might think that it is our legal system that is messed up, and you would be right, but who do you think created it? Lawyers created the legal system. Judges. They have created a nation of people whose first response to a problem is "sue them". They have created an environment where they are, consciously or not, creating job security. I am amazed at the people who scoff at the hot coffee lawsuit at McDonald's, yet their first thought when they are wronged is to sue someone. Some telemarketer called me in the middle of the night - I'll take them to court! Lawyers have dug themselves into the skin of our society, and have played a large part in ruining it. They have created an atmosphere of fear, where nobody will admit they are wrong - ever! If someone admits to being wrong, they are ripe for a lawsuit. Malpractice insurance is so high that some doctors can't stay in business. A doctor makes a mistake, and immediately runs to his legal council about what to do. Legal council will try to handle the issue within the legal system, which basically means trying to get the doctor absolved of any wrongdoing. The patient gets frustrated at playing the legal game, and decides to sue! It is insane.
I have a friend who is in law school, and he basically hates humanity right now. I would have classified him as morally questionable before he started this degree, but he is even put off by the legal profession. He told me he hates it. But that is where the money is at, which is pretty much the other half of the problem in this country. Combine greed and our legal system, and you have one fine clusterfuck of a society.
Hey, smartass, so what is the solution? I have no idea. We are in a bad situation, where the laws are simply growing and growing, and the attitude is getting worse and worse. I don't know how it can get better. Thank you, legal system, and all your lawyer henchmen, for making our society what it is today. I won't deny that there are some good lawyers out there, but they shouldn't even be necessary. The fact that you have to classify them as good or bad should tell you something. We have accepted the facts that our society has become a legal game. It is sad.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Intellectual Property for Auctions ...now available to the highest bidder.
There's a bit of truth to that statement that nobody seems to have noticed yet. Take note of the following statement from the story:
MercExchange is ultimately looking to sell its entire portfolio of auction-related patents. Names being bandied about as possible acquirers include Amazon, Yahoo and eBay itself.
Doesn't it seem like MercExchange is using the threat of litigation in order to coerce eBay into purchasing these patents? A week from now, I expect to read the following story: "MercExchange has settled its lawsuit against eBay. eBay will acquire the intellectual property from MercExchange for an undisclosed amount of cash." eBay can then go after Yahoo and Amazon, if they so choose.
Alternatively, Yahoo or Amazon could purchase the patents, and then go after eBay. We know from past experience that Amazon isn't beyond suing its competitors over trivial patents.
MercExchange doesn't seem to have a competitive position. Personally, I've never heard of them -- eBay, Yahoo, and Amazon are the big players in the online auction market. Any of these players might be interested in acquiring the MercExchange intellectual property in order to use against the other two.
As for MercExchange, since they're aiming to sell their patents anyway, they can probably fetch a higher price by using a lawsuit as a bargaining chip.