IBM Sues Amazon For Patent Infringement
A large number of readers wrote in about IBM suing Amazon over commerce patents. The Ars Technica coverage linked is one of the few sources that goes beyond the brief AP or Reuters stories that everyone is running. Here is IBM's press release. Some of the patents in question go back to the 80s and they do seem to pretty much wrap up the idea of online commerce, if they prove valid. IBM says many others are licensing the patents but Amazon won't give them the time of day on the subject.
The article says that Amazon is fighting unfairly against their competition with their One click patent. They are trying to close down other web sites. They just receive their own medicine. I'm sure these connoisseurs will appreciate it.
If IBM holds a patent for 'Posting messages to an interactive service' there may well be. I mean, some of these are pretty broad:
US 5,796,967 - Presenting Applications in an Interactive Service.
US 5,442,771 - Storing Data in an Interactive Network.
US 7,072,849 - Presenting Advertising in an Interactive Service.
US 5,446,891 - Adjusting Hypertext Links with Weighted User Goals and Activities.
US 5,319,542 - Ordering Items Using an Electronic Catalogue.
Without reading the actual applications, it sounds to me like that covers like 99% of anyone selling or storing anything on-line. I mean, WTF? Storing data in an interactive network? How broad is that net?
What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
... ain't she, Jeff? Couldn't have happened to a slimier company.
Good point.
"...IBM's legal department to contend with."
They were not referred to as the Nazgul without reasons.
These guys will be serious contenders in almost any arena that IBM will choose to enter.
IBM may be a shadow of it's peak days, but they are no punks still today. They have proven themselves survivors in markets that have extreme turnover rates, and a lot of corporate corpses laying by the wayside to prove it.
Anymore, it gets more difficult to pick sides in the patent/IP battle.
IBM vs. SCO- no problem picking sides there, IBM vs. Amazon- not as clear-cut for me, but I'm leaning towards IBM's side for this one just based on both of their track records.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Actually, it isn't as obvious as the title would make it seem. Google it and read the actual application.
Essentially, it is about automating B2B supply chain management. Catalogs from several vendors are stored on publicly available servers. A potential purchaser makes a private copy combining the items from several vendors into a single catalog, then modifying that catalog with privately negotiated price structures and terms for those vendors. Then the PO is generated and transmitted directly to the vendor.
So it is not about simply doing what we've always done with mail-order, it is about efficiently comparison shopping and maintaining private price lists for use by procurement functions in a business.
Then be very surprised. IBM has a long history of strong-arming other companies with its patent portfolio and extracting license money from them. In fact, Marshall Phelps (who now works for Microsoft fwiw), turned IBM's sleeping patent portfolio into a $1+ billion profit.
Donate free food here
Not to mention the fact that if you're a software developer, the standard advice is to avoid knowing anything about the details of software patents. If they can argue you "knowingly infringed" on a patent you're up for triple damages.
I suspect this is one of those things where the situation is so stupid, no one can believe it's the case -- the patent system is designed to encourage publication of useful technical information, but this triple-damages rule means that no one can read it.
1. US 5,796,967 - Presenting Applications in an Interactive Service.
2. US 5,442,771 - Storing Data in an Interactive Network.
3. US 7,072,849 - Presenting Advertising in an Interactive Service.
4. US 5,446,891 - Adjusting Hypertext Links with Weighted User Goals and Activities.
5. US 5,319,542 - Ordering Items Using an Electronic Catalogue.
Note the algorithmic detail hidden in the patents hide some of the totally obvious "Hey isn't that common sense?" and "How can they patent that!?"
Of course I agree that on the surface, the patent claims are "insane" which is why Amazon ignores IBM. Almost as insane as a patten for a one-stop-buy button. The system is way broken, but read the patents yourselves to jump to the same conclusion.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher