Amazon's Lawyers Jerking USPTO Around?

theodp writes "Reacting to an actor's do-it-yourself legal effort that triggered a reexam of Amazon.com's 1-Click patent, attorneys for Amazon have fired back, deluging the USPTO with documents to review, including Wikipedia articles. With the latest batch, Amazon's high-priced law firm even requested that USTPO examiners review an archived page of Norm Quotes (yes, Norm from Cheers) and rule that it does not invalidate CEO Jeff Bezos' 1-Click patent."

Comments

Re:Goldilocks Was Not a Patent Lawyer

[trix7117]

Did you even look at the Norm page? It doesn't have any "kind of navigation feature that someone compared to some aspect of the one-click process", it has a bunch of text (the quotes) and a single link at the bottom of the page (link to the "Cheers Main Page"). There is nothing on that page that has anything to do with one-click in any way unless you are saying that a regular old link is somehow related to one-click, in which case you better submit just about every page on the web. There's no possible explanation for it other than "Amazon's lawyers trying to bury relevant prior art". Look at the page before you state is "is not obviously irrelevant".

Re:All substantial links "proving" this are to Fli

[Lockejaw]

The Flickr links are scans of legal documents.

Prior art

[grandpa-geek]

Part of the prior art for the Amazon one-click patent can be found in Babylonian cuneiform. The one click patent is partially based on the concept of the open account. Customer walks into store, points to an item, says "I want it. Put it on my tab," storekeeper recognizes customer, provides item, and records it on customer's tab. In ancient Babylonia, customer accounts were kept in cuneiform.

The problem is that the Patent Office doesn't search Babylonian cuneiform for prior art on business methods. Nor do they search much of anywhere else.