Dell Infringes on Patent by Selling Overseas?

senior.wrangler writes "Looks like new evidence that the U.S. Patent Office is hiring monkeys to bulk-approve new patents. DE Technologies has been granted a patent covering international transactions handled over the computer. Here's a quote from their web site: With patent coverage securing 80% of the world 's trading markets, DE Technologies is securing licensing arrangements with international trading participants. Kinda creepy, if you ask me."

Comments

This is just silly

[eofpi]

Sounds like another one for Public Patents.

Read it for yourself

[Capybara]

The actual patent is #6,460,020. I would summarize it by saying that it covers writing a program to do all of the stuff you need to do to sell products internationally, including currency conversion, tariff and shipping calculations, etc. Sounds pretty obvious to me. Enjoy...

Re:Has anyone actually found the patent?

[.orvp]

I did, by snooping around the website of the (I consider) punks. They announced they won the patent in a press release about getting the Borderless Order Entry System (BOES(TM)) patent. The actual patent would be found on the USPTO.gov website. It was filed December 29, 1997, and so it really was prior to much internet international transactions taking place. And this patent went through a lot of scrutiny from what I see.

At one point, it was even mentioned in Congress by a Virginia lawmaker as a horrible use of the patent system. (Read another news story that has more on this.) And it was revised many times. I see a lot of work done on this.

Now do I think they are bastards? Oh yea. Do they have a case? Unfortunatly, it appears so. But this sort of thing shouldn't be patented in the first place.

BOES PATENTABILITY POSITION PAPER

[stoborrobots]

Check out why they think that this product is actually patentable...

from http://www.detechnologies.com/pos_papers/patent_po sition_paper.doc

About This Paper

Along with the recent issuance of U.S. Patent No. 6,460,020 for the Borderless Order Entry System (BOESTM) on October 1, 2002, some questions have been raised as to the patentability of the BOES invention. These questions relate generally to the false premise that the patent covers the simple automation of an old process on conducting international trade. The purpose of this position paper is to explain, first, that the BOES technology falls within the scope of inventions that are protected by U.S. patent laws, and, second, that the BOES invention deserves such protection.

...[snip]...

Does BOES Deserve Patent Protection?

To best answer this question, we must first understand: (1) What is the BOES technology?; (2) The timing significance of the BOES patent application filing; (3) The scope and extent of the Patent Office examination and subsequent reviews; and (4) Whether copyright law can adequately protect the BOES invention.

1. What is the BOES technology?

BOES is a fully integrated complex software system used to export or import goods between two or more countries. The purchase or sale of goods, whether between businesses or with the ultimate consumer, requires the connection and use of a complex set of service operations. These service operations include: ordering the goods; transporting the goods between buyer and seller; guarantying payment; insuring the goods in case of loss or damage; preparing and filing the appropriate documents with governments, carriers, and banks -- all within a framework of different languages, currencies, and trade laws.

Before BOES, the capability did not exist to turn to a software system and have all the necessary tasks efficiently performed to conduct an international transaction for the sale of goods.

2. The timing significance of the BOES patent application filing

The original BOES patent application was filed at the end of 1997 -- well before the "Gold Rush" to the Patent Office by others seeking patent protection on business methods inspired by the State Street Bank case. After this seminal patent case was published, filing business method patent applications became the "in vogue" thing to do. Business method patent application filings skyrocketed in 1999 and 2000 and the Patent Office was deluged without the capability to effectively respond due to insufficient number of qualified examiners and inadequate prior art database resources.

This situation dramatically changed for the better when, in March 2000, the Patent Office director ordered that each and every business method patent application go through a quality assurance review by seasoned patent examiners after its initial allowance. Furthermore, the Patent Office poured significant financial resources into hiring additional patent examiners with qualifications to examine applications in the financial technology area. The Patent Office also dramatically increased the patent examiners' capability to search publications from around the world to assist them in making prior invention determinations. The impact of these Patent Office improvements is reflected in the number of business method patents that are currently allowed and issued. Today, less than 30% of all business method patent applications are allowed -- drastically down from its all-time high of nearly 80% allowance only a few years ago.

On a related issue, it is very important to note that the patent application filing date determines whether a prior patent or publication is considered prior art. The examiner will review patents and publications prior to the filing date to determine patentability. In the case of the BOES p

Re:Jesus Christ...

[AndroidCat]

US Patent No. 6,460,020 and I swear this was covered in Slashdot before. (2002 is a little long to shout Dupe! however.)

Re:Licensing? WTF?

[1ucius]

Unfortunately, the patent was filed in 1996, so 5 year old art doesn't help. Even if Amazon.com was prior art, I'm not sure if they did everything necessary (e.g., did Amazon use local currency or price everything in USD).

1. A computer implemented process for carrying out an international commercial transaction comprising:

* running a transaction program on a computer system so as to integrate processes including:
o (a) selecting a language from a menu in which to view cataloge information on products;
o (b) selecting a currency from amenu in which to obtain price information;
o (c) selecting a product to be purchased and a destination for shipping such product to be purchased;
o (d) accessing at least one local or remote database for obtaining
+ (i) price information for the product to be purchased; and
+ (ii) a product code for an international goods clasification system pertinent to such product; and
+ (iii) international shipping information related to an origination point of such product and said destination;
o (e) calculating costs involved in moving such product to said destination based upon said destination and such product;
o (f) determining a total cost of the transaction that includes a price of the product;
o (g) receiving an order for such product thereby triggering an electronic process for confirming existence of available funds; and
o (h) upon confirmation of availability of said funds, accepting said order, generating an electronic record, such record including the content of a commercial invoice, to facilitate passage of such product to said destination.

I have prior art from 1993

[ites]

To be precise: I helped build a tour operating system used to provide travel agents with tools to book voyages. Now, this is an example from 1993 but we all know that similar systems (SABRE, AMADEUS) are old and go back to at least the 1980s.

The system we built conforms pretty much to the criteria of the patent. Note that the patent does not say this is a "self-service system", it describes only the mechanisms for conducting an international transaction.

I'd add that in 1995 this was perhaps not obvious, even if today it's laughably so. However, there is most definitely prior art.