Slashdot Mirror
The Grinch Who Patented Christmas
theodp writes "The USPTO has reversed its earlier rejection and notified Amazon that the patent application for CEO Jeff Bezos' invention, Coordinating Delivery of a Gift, has been examined and is allowed for issuance as a patent. BTW, Amazon was represented before the USPTO by Perkins Coie, who also supplied Bezos with legal muscle in his personal fight against zoning laws that threatened to curb the size of his Medina mansion (reg.) before the City of Medina eventually gave up on regulating the size of homes (reg.)."
The problem with the USPTO is that they don't consider anything "obvious" if you add these three little words to the end of it: on the Internet. Just add those and everything old is new again as far as they're concerned.
rooooar
Why dont we try to patent "Protecting Intellectual Property from Theft"... They'd probably let it go through, too...
Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
What the hell does the size of Bezos' home have to do with a patent? That's right, NOTHING! We have something in this country called liberty and if Bezos owns land and wants to build a house that uses 99.9% of it, he should be able to build it. City councils dictating to folks about the style and size of private homes is over the line. Safety standards and building codes are fine within reason.
Oh, and the patent sucks, Bezos is a jerk...
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
So, after reading the patent, as I understand it, I am allowed to look up a Zip Code for my personal enjoyment, but if I do it for a web client sending a package to someone, I have to licence the right to look up the freeken zip code !!!
Un Friggen Believable..
Time travel is possible. We are quickly heading for 1984.
The real issue is there is no real penalty for patenting aleady used things. I think for each and every "instance" of prior art, there should be a fine of $500. If there are numerouse instances, then I think the patent holder should be guilty of fraud and thrown into jail...
This is, in fact, something the floral industry does routinely with respect to funeral arrangements. Someone calls with an order "for the John Smith of Benson, IL funeral" and the florist starts calling around trying to figure out what funeral home has John on ice.
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
OK, I read the text of the patent. It is complete and utter hogwash. It's another one of those 'something+computer' or 'something+Internet' schemes. I know I've called for stupid patent action before, just to make a point, but maybe it's time for something more drastic. Let's take every non-computer, non-Internet patent in the USPTO database, liberally sprinkle the words "computer" and "Internet" in the body of the text, then submit them for patent.
There is prior art here. In fact, it's basically what UPS, FedEx, Airborn Express does already if there's a problem with a delivery. It's basically how the Post Office handles undeliverables. They contact the recipient based on additional information in their database, including home phone, business phone or e-mail.
Just look at the opener to the "invention's" background: The Internet comprises a vast number of computers that are interconnected for the purpose of exchanging information. Various protocols, such as the HyperText Transfer Protocol ("HTTP"), have been defined to aid in this exchange of information." You gotta be kidding me! Remember when you were in grade school, and there was always that one kid who opened his report with "Webster's defines 'x' as...'? That's what this sounds like to me. You know what Bezos and crew invented? They invented a way to transmit bullshit over the Internet.
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
I disagree, here's why
"A person shall be entitled to a patent unless--
(a) he invention WAS KNOWN OR USED by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or"
"A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically DISCLOSED OR DESCRIBED a"
These are subjective things 'known' 'used' 'disclosed' 'described' determined first by a patent examiner. The judicial branch only becomes involved later, when they are faced with the situation where the patent officer has already effectively accepted that it is not "KNOWN OR USED" or "DISCLOSED OR DESCRIBED " and are taking a challenge.
So the Judicial branch make their interpretation in the context that the patent officer has done his job.
If I'm wrong then please point me to US case law where the patent office has refused a patent because it is 'known' or 'used' and the courts have then set an interpretation that overrules them.
Which makes him worth 4.95 billion times more than Mother Teresa, right?
Because net worth is how to measure how important you are, and not how well you can game the system, right? Everyone who's rich deserves it, and everyone who's poor, too. Right?
www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
But why so many stories about Amazon's patents in particular?
Because Amazon's patents are particularly evil: they try to patent trivial business methods.
I'm sure you can find plenty to pick on in [IBM's] applications.
Go ahead and review their applications and let us know. We complain about the patents that we know about.
Not to mention that Amazon is often on the receiving end of patent aggression.
All the worse that Amazon is engaging in this kind of conduct themselves and isn't more aggressively working towards changing the patent system.
Note that Amazon's patents do not help them defend against that sort of abuse.
Yes, the way to break this is to hit them with their own weapons. It needs money a little careful planning. The trick is to get them fighting each other, filing maliciously crafted faux patents through invisible holdings companies and playing them off against one another, sell them not to the highest bidder, but to cause the maximum damage. Once we have McGonads fighting Bugger King over their meat rights we should see the dicks starting to wave. Stir it up. Make them victims of their own rules faster than they can hire lawyers to unpick the mess. Us individuals and small businesses now have nothing to lose from bringing the house down.
Doesn't FedEx do this already? I mean. Its basicaly trying to guess where a package goes when the address is incomplete. Come to think of it a lot of other software packages do this as well. So what's different about what Amazon does?
Specks
Batteries not included
>I'm sorry, does Bezos actually have a clue about doing things
Bezos net worth in 2003 was $4.95 billion dollars.
Here is the OP quote, including the half you deleted:
>I'm sorry, does Bezos actually have a clue about doing things, or is all he knows how to game the patent and legal system?
The sheer size of Bezos's net worth isn't relevant to the question, which was concerned with its origin.
In most circles, getting a parcel delivered on time and to the right address is considered a good thing.
And is preventing others from doing likewise also considered a good thing?