Slashdot Mirror
FFII vs. Amazon Gift Ordering Patent
Elektroschock writes "The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure fights in court against Amazon.com's Gift ordering patent. It is about ordering gifts via email and phone communication. Amazon's gift ordering patent is seen as a danger for webdesigners and E-Commerce in Europe. It is derived from the well-known Amazon.com's 1-click patent. The flowers distributor Fleurop and Germany's Computer Acience Association "Gesellschaft fur Informatik" untertake similar legal action against Amazon's trivial patent. FFII's Hartmut Pilch said the fight against patents was not over. It is a cheap opportunity to get some exercise in patent litigation."
Yes, but if I register copyright on "code A to perform process B", and my opponent applies for a patent on process B 6 months down the line, then code A should in theory be proof that prior art for process B exists. Particularly since the registration process involves giving the copyright office a copy of much of the code in question (according to the US Copyright Office).
In reality of course, this relies on government departments working together flawlessly. And we all know how often that happens :P
Yes, it's correct. This is what was posted on a mailing list (one without public archives):
Opposition
the Foundation for a Free Informational Infrastructure, represented by the president Hartmut Pilch, Munich, represented by president Hartmut Pilch, opponent,
- Trustees: Attorneys Dr. Matthias Lenhardt, Olaf Koglin and Holger Scharfenberg, Kurfuerstendamm 46, 10747 Berlin -
against the granted patent
European Patent EP 0 927 945
Registration no 99105948.6
Patent owner: amazon.com Inc., USA
in the name and with the authorisation of the opponent we request
to fully revoke the patent.
Justification:
A. Opposition causes
The opposition is based on:
the subject is not not an invention in the sense of art 52 paragraph 1 of EPC
(Art. 100(a), Art 52 EPC) and does not involve an inventive step (Art 100(a),
Art 56 EPC), and that the subject matter extends beyond the content of
the application (Art 100(c) EPC, Art 123(2) EPC).
Oral proceedings are applied for
B. Justification in single steps
I. (Text by hartmut)
II.
Furthermore the opposition is justified by the justification of the
oppositions of
a) Fleurop Interflora European Business Company AG of
26.09.2003
For any case - especially in case that the oppoisition is
partially or fully revoked - those oppositions are made
fully the content of the opposition.
III.
Opposition by Fleurop-Interflora European Business Company AG
IV.
Opposition by Gesellschaft fuer Informatik e.V.
C. Formalities
EUR 610 (by cheque) have been handed in before deadline directly by the opponent.
Donate free food here
Eg this Wednesday you are invited to a Parliamentary Evening in Berlin. Other events at Paris, Brussels (FOSDEM),Leuven (yet another conference), Rome, Stockholm etc can be found via the calendar at the events page.
National mailing lists (meet your reps before European Parliament elections in June!) can be subscribed via aktiv.ffii.org.
I could have swore I saw this very post a long time ago in another patent stort here.. so I went back to a few patent stories and what did I find?
The very same post
This patent does NOT cover simply ording gifts over the internet, this patent covers:
A method in a computer system for ordering a gift for delivery from a gift giver to a recipient, the method comprising:
receiving from the gift giver an indication that the gift is to be delivered to the recipient and an electronic mail address of the recipient; and
sending to a gift delivery computer system an indication of the gift and the received electronic mail address, wherein the gift delivery computer system coordinates delivery of the gift by
sending an electronic mail message addressed to the electronic mail address of the recipient requesting that the recipient provide delivery information including a postal address for the gift; and
upon receiving the delivery information, electronically initiating delivery of the gift in accordance with the received delivery information.
Please remember that the title means nothing, the abstract means nothing, and the description means nothing. The only part that gets legal protection is the claims.
"I have a porkchop, you have a porkchop. I have a veal, you have a veal".
Extracting the address from an email, web page etc is not in the first claim
:
Looks like it is to me
"[...] determining whether the gift order includes sufficient information so that the gift can be delivered to the recipient;
when sufficient information is not provided in the gift order, obtaining delivery information from one or more information sources; and [...]"
I read that to mean that they use whatever information the giver specified (email, user id, whatever) to go out and determine the rest.
Agreed on your point about the basis for the opposition though, and FWIW I also don't like the idea that this should be patentable. After all, doesn't the post office do it all the time with partially addressed letters?
If anyone wants to take a look at the actual patent from the EPO, and not just the information which FFII has, go here. Also note that this a divisional application of EP902381 and has an effective filing date of March 17, 1999.
"I have a porkchop, you have a porkchop. I have a veal, you have a veal".
Actually I thought it was Final Fantasy 11 (ffll), since that is the next Final Fantasy, isn't it?
Actually, it's a current one. It's been out since 10/28/03 for the PC, and is going to be released soon for the PS2.