Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Suing Blockbuster for Patent Infringement

grouchomarxist writes "Netflix is suing Blockbuster for Patent Infringement. From the article: 'Netflix holds two U.S. patents for its business methodology, which calls for subscribers to pay a monthly fee to select and rent DVDs from the company's Web site and to maintain a list of titles telling Netflix in which order to ship the films, according to the patents, which were included as exhibits in the lawsuit. The first patent, granted in 2003, covers the method by which Netflix customers select and receive a certain number of movies at a time, and return them for more titles. The second patent, issued on Tuesday, "covers a method for subscription-based online rental that allows subscribers to keep the DVDs they rent for as long as they wish without incurring any late fees, to obtain new DVDs without incurring additional charges and to prioritize and reprioritize their own personal dynamic queue -- of DVDs to be rented," the lawsuit said.'"

12 of 410 comments (clear)

  1. Patents on business methods are stupid. by tpgp · · Score: 5, Insightful
    TFA:
    "Blockbuster has been willfully and deliberately copying Netflix's business methods," Netflix spokesman Steve Swasey said.
    So what if they're copying your business methods - thats called competition.
    --
    My pics.
    1. Re:Patents on business methods are stupid. by Mecdemort · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It has long been said that: Imitation is the highest form of flattery.

      In the past copying products in a different form was alowd. You couldn't patten chicken noodle soup, but you could pattent a specific formula. This form of patenting ideas is going to strangle us as a civilization, and lead to a few companies that control everything.

      Just wait until someone patents a pure idea, and if anyone gets caught thinking about it you have to pay them.

  2. a sad time by tont0r · · Score: 5, Funny

    next 7-11 will sue circle K because they both run the same business.

    1. Re:a sad time by QuantumPion · · Score: 5, Funny

      1) Patent "the process of exchanging goods or services for finiancial reimbursement"

      2) Sue the entire world, muahahahaha

      3) Profit!

  3. Utter, utter BS by stunt_penguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK so what if I go out and patent queueing at a shop checkout to pay for goods, or paying for magazines to be delivered to your home on a monthly basis, or, or........

    This shit has to stop, I mean netflix are just being totally petty about the whole damn thing. I mean, what *other* way is there to organise online DVD rental? Are they going to enforce patents on their *whole* business model.

    This has to stop. Gah!

    --
    When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  4. Library patents by doddi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first patent, granted in 2003, covers the method by which Netflix customers select and receive a certain number of movies at a time, and return them for more titles.

    Isn't this exactly how libraries have worked since ...um, long before 2003?

  5. Re:Aside from patentability by Pofy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >Aside from whether or not business methods should be patentable... since
    >they were granted the patent, it's pretty obvious that they had come up with
    >a novel process which was straight-up copied.

    Please tell what part of it that is novel and non obvious (to people in THAT area)? In addition, it should be something that no one has done before 2003 (or even later since that was the first patent).

  6. Anyone wanting to discuss this intelligently ... by Throtex · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... should probably take the time to read the patents in controversy assigned to Netflix first.

    They are:
    US Patent No. 6,966,484 to Calonje, et al.; and
    US Patent No. 7,024,381 to Hastings, et al.

    As you do so, look at the claim language, not the specification, to find out what the invention actually covers. Discuss.

  7. Re:Worried! by Eccles · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm in the process of patenting my invention, I call it "money".

    *Looks in wallet*

    Well, I'm not infringing...

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  8. My friend at Netflix by leather_helmet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My good friend who has been working at netflix for approximately 5 years says that most of the employees think the lawsuit issue with blockbuster is a waste of time

    Blockbuster has been getting their asses kicked in regards to marketshare vs. netflix for about the last year or so
    When blockbuster initially tried to compete with Nflix, the Nflix folks were a bit scared, including my buddy who was worried about the future of the company he helped develop - however, after Nflix's somewhat recent resurgence & increased user subscription, which in turn boosted the stock prices from all time lows, blockbuster has become a non-issue to Nflix (well at least to my buddy and most of the staff)
    --

  9. Re:Before you jump on the "Patents are bad" bandwa by orzetto · · Score: 5, Interesting
    [if] that innovation has cost you a certain amount in development costs, should you not have the right to protect that investment?

    I believe not at all. Rights are granted for the benefit of the whole of society, not single individuals: otherwise you might as well reintroduce slavery, as it was very beneficial to a few guys. Having a monopoly on something that can be reproduced indefinitely such as business or programming methods, and knowledge in general, means unfairly harming everybody else. You are not damaged by someone else who's using your methods (this does not block you from using them), unless you mean by competition, and last time I checked there is quite a load of legislation that actually protects competition, as it is demonstrated to improve product quality for society.

    If your competition can just steal your methods, [...]

    You cannot steal a method or an idea. You can only copy it. The original author still has it.

    ... then you would have no incentive to innovate.

    On the contrary, if you know that the competition is going to figure out your methods and implement them after a while, you know also that you must keep innovating and leveraging your position as first in the market (it takes time to make a Webshop from just an idea: and if you are slow and competition is faster than you to commercialise, it's all your fault). In other words, you have to do actual work, not rest on your laurels because some law forbid everybody else from using your methods.

    From the whole society's point of view (that is, our point of view), if Netflix wins we are going to see worse service from Blockbuster and less competition. If Blockbuster wins, competition will be closer between the companies and they will have to find a way to get more customers.

    The more I think of the patent system the more I think that the whole concept is flawed. As generally with IP, Beethoven and Mozart died in poverty, Britney Spears is filthy rich.

    --
    Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
  10. While patenting by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did they also include a patent for slowing shipping down because you rent too many movies from them?

    After all, Unlimited isn't really unlimited with netflix.

    I'm leaving netflix To go to blockbuster - I guess people like me defecting is what really prompted the lawsuit. Instead of living up to the "Unlimited Rentals" they are going to sue everyone else out of existance.

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!