Slashdot Mirror
Netflix Sues Blockbuster for Patent Infringement
StrongGlad writes "Is the concept of renting movies over the Internet an original idea that deserves patent protection? Netflix claims it is, and is suing Blockbuster for patent infringement, alleging they are copying its seven-year-old online movie-rental business method. Netflix argues that it has patents covering its many online features, including allowing subscribers to keep DVDs for as long as they want without incurring a late fee, obtaining new DVDs upon return of those already watched, and prioritizing their own personal movie list. Blockbuster, for its part, has counterclaimed, insisting that Netflix is trying to monopolize the online movie-rental industry and stifle competition. Blockbuster also alleges that Netflix obtained its patents fraudulently by failing to disclose pertinent information to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and further contends there is nothing original about renting videos online in the first place."
Since when are business models subject to patent rights? Products, yes, but business models?
"You can't compete with me. I was here first. Go away!"
How exactly is renting movies online an original or novel idea? I think Netflix is feeling the pinch in their pockets from Blockbuster and is resorting to some desperate measures. I really hope the courts send a message to businesses that patent lawsuits are not just another source of income.
Go Illini!!!
I'm a big netflix fan. I got into it in order to re-watch the entire xfiles series last year. I also like the story of its origins: someone finally got sick of ridiculous late-fee charges, and in answer, blockbuster lost mega business. Blockbuster countered with its own service which I thought was not doing well against netflix. This latest news seems to indicate otherwise.
But netflix using patent laws this way is crazy. Blockbuster should counter with the charge that they own the ability to perform the action of receiving monetary units for analogue and digital copies of light and audio produced theatrical and documentary events....
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
It was only a matter of time. Porter's model proven again. Blockbuster (like Microsoft) let its guard down and let a critical external force overtake its market-share: Substitutes.
Go ahead Netflix, kick 'em while they're down! You're the new guerrilla in the DVD rental business, and rightly so. On behalf of every poor college kid that ever got a collections notice for $4.38 for late fees that weren't paid in 4 weeks or less, I say thank you. Bury the bastards.
If we're lucky, this might be the case to finally set a precedent against the old formula
If Blockbuster doesn't settle out of court, that is...
I have an ex who worked for Blockbuster for quite some time.
They were developing methods for on-line rentals and even on-demend video distribution back in about 1999 IIRC. Netflix was actually copying Blockbusters model , only doing it on line, until then. (Having late fees, etc, making people pay for postage).
They will be deperately hard pressed to prove they innovated many , if any, of these business practices, and I believe some of their patents could actually be thrown out because of being brought to the light of day like this.
I despise with a passion "business model patents" which basically say "we figured out how to do business, don't you dare try to compete with us!"
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
Unfortunately, not everyone's as cool as Ben Franklin. Especially with his use of 'd instead of ed. I love that.
Remember kids, tin foil doesn't work, so use LeadHat.
Since when do politicians nip problems in the bud? Folks, this has to get worse before it gets better. Our patent system will receive the overhaul it desparately needs when:
A) There's a concrete enough financial interest that it generates a lobby.
B) Joe Sixpack is displeased with the situation.
We can all make B) appear to come a little faster by bitching to our Congress-critters every time we see an abuse like this. Remember net2phone's "method of establishing a communication channel by exchanging IP addresses" patent? Don't let this shit slide!
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
Business patents are by definition monopolies. No patent should be awarded on anything that isn't a working mechanical device, at least a prototype. Descriptions of ideas, whether human readable or machine readable, are subject only to copyright. Identifying marks, like logos and slogans, are only trademarks.
These principles are obvious. Not only are they politically obvious to anyone who understands that artificial government monopolies must merely balance freedom of expression against investment protection. They are obvious to anyone in business. It's obvious to people patenting how much advantage they gain. And it's obvious to people excluded how much competition it prohibits.
Maybe now that American business is becoming at least as much a consumer of IP as a producer, these corporations will battle away the IP law imbalances that crimp their economy. Then we'll also see how obvious it is that corporations are the only "persons" which matter to the government.
--
make install -not war
I can undertand the patent case for the envelopes that Netflix uses. That is a pretty novel invention, and one that I have not seen before. They may have a case on that one. I'd also like to hear if anybody has a good rebutall as to why that patent would not be valid.
As for the other patent, I stopped reading at "a computer-implemented approach for renting items to customers". That patent is just lunacy, and as the abstract explains it, I have no idea how it could get through the patent office. That's just plain wrong.
A community-oriented lyrics site