USPTO Imposes 'Undue Hardship' On 1-Click Lawyers

theodp writes "Looks like Amazon's high-priced Silicon Valley attorneys will have to endure the 'undue hardship' of awakening early next Thursday morning to defend CEO Jeff Bezos' 1-Click patent in a Video Hearing before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. The attorneys' plea for a 1 p.m. ET start time drew a be-there-at-9-or-be-square response from the USPTO. The 1-Click patent has fallen into disfavor lately with USPTO Examiners, who no longer have the same boss who once sent a 1-Click love letter to the WSJ arguing that the merits of Amazon's patent were proven by a contest run by a Jeff Bezos-financed company, an argument that was later rejected by Congress."

Comments

Timezones

[adam1234]

They're not really complaining about the fact that it's 9 AM, but that in their timezone it will be only 6 AM. It's hardly fair to fault them for that.

Re:Timezones

[pembo13]

How much are they being paid?

Re:Timezones

[Helios1182]

More than enough to wake up early one day.

Re:Timezones

[Anonymous Coward]

Regardless of the time zone, my boss does not consider it "undue hardship" when a system failure occurs at 2am and I am required to promptly attend to the matter. Whether this effort requires driving 45 minutes each way to the data center or VPN'ing in to the network, I'm still up and working at 2am...and I don't make anywhere near $400/hr. I'm not complaining, mind you. I just accept this as part of the job, as should they. Suck it up and show up boys and girls.

Re:Timezones

[mikelieman]

They CHOSE to have it via teleconference.

They are OBLIGATED to travel to the Court in DC. They got what they asked for.

Re:Timezones

[belmolis]

It's one thing to be accustomed to starting work at 06:00 and quite another for someone who normally starts work at, say, 09:00 to have to do something at 06:00, especially something like law for which you have to be alert. It isn't the early hour per se that is the problem, its the difference from what they are accustomed to. For those of us older than 2^5, such deviations from one's normal schedule can be pretty disruptive. I think it is quite reasonable for Amazon's lawyers to ask that the hearing be held at 13:00 Washington time. It makes things much more reasonable for them while, as far as I can see, imposing no real burden on the Patent Office. Why is it a problem for the Patent Office to hold the hearing at 13:00, well within their normal work hours?

I have no sympathy for the one-click patent, but making Amazon's lawyers get up so early just seems petty.

Re:Timezones

[Harmonious Botch]

It's not the starting time, it's the change in starting time.

I know it makes a difference for me. I live in southern California. When I do business in Chicago, I'm a little fuzzy for the first day. So I go a day earlier. I pay for an extra day's food and an extra night's lodging. And when I'm at a convention, making decisions worth thousands of dollars per hour, being more alert more than compensates for the extra expenses.

For guys who have millions hanging on this, it is a relevant issue. I'd ask the court too. It costs nothing to try and they might do it.
Since it failed, I expect that they will fly to DC a day or two early. They'd be crazy not to.

Re:Timezones

[mbone]

It's a freaking phone call, for goodness sake. They're lucky they didn't have to show up here in Alexandria at 9:00 AM EDT.

They probably shouldn't try doing any business with India or China or Japan.

The Company Hangs on 1-Click? Balderdash!

[reporter]

Does the fate of Amazon hang on which its exclusive rights to 1-click shopping? I am incredulous. What matters to me is the variety of the products, the quality of the products, the prompt arrival at my condominium, and the state of the product upon arrival. Amazon has defied the critics and proven to be a successful business model due to those 4 aspects.

Often, customers cannot find the right product in the local store, which has a policy that "if it is not on the shelf, it is not in stock"; in response, customers can go to Amazon and likely find the exact product that they want. Amazon is the ultimate mail-order company online. it has taken the traditional Montgomery-Wards catalog, increased its size by a factor of 1000, and put it on the Web. Gosh. Can you even buy polonium-210 at Amazon?

In short, Amazon is wasting money in trying to defend this patent. Can the typical customer be so stupid that 1-less-mouse-click is the deciding factor in whether to buy stuff at Amazon?

Re:The Company Hangs on 1-Click? Balderdash!

[arth1]

In short, Amazon is wasting money in trying to defend this patent. Can the typical customer be so stupid that 1-less-mouse-click is the deciding factor in whether to buy stuff at Amazon?

You might be forgetting that Amazon uses this patent (and has a verifiable record of having used it) to squash competitors by suing them if they put up competing web sites, doing the obvious thing.
It's not about what Amazon does themselves, it's an offensive weapon in their arsenal, just like their "Referral" patent, which prevents other web stores from having web pages link to them for a small cut of the sales.

Some of us still boycott Amazon over this -- for eight years and counting, I have refused to do business with them, or refused to accept gifts bought from there (just as I refuse to accept gifts made through child labor). Does it help, when we're just a small minority that boycott them? One might as well ask whether a minority should vote or not. Yes, it helps. There's quite a few thousand dollars I haven't spent through Amazon.com that has gone to competitors instead. And I'm not alone. And, most important of all, it helps me feel slightly better, just like a donation to a favorite charity does.

Two choices

[mccalli]

Choice 1: Just get out of bed on time for that day.

Choice 2: Get hotel in correct timezone, fly there two days before.

et voila.

Cheers,
Ian

Patenting Ideas

[unlametheweak]

Although there may be valid prior art for the one-click patent, the real issue with me is that you can't and shouldn't be able to patent ideas. This is one of the most bizarre and unfair things I've ever heard of. If I had the time and money I'm sure I could patent two-click, three-click and all the other click shopping experiences. I would have a virtual monopoly on shopping. But stupid is as stupid does. Let's hope things improve.

It's difficult, but possible to countersue a troll

[Infonaut]

So tell me, is there a process in place whereby a company can recoup legal costs when a litigious patent holder turns out to be holding a pile of nothing?

The issuance of a patent by the USPTO provides a preliminary presumption of validity. So if I obtain a patent on orange trees, and sue the crap out of everyone who grows orange trees without shelling out big bucks to me, I'm not really acting in bad faith. Because the USPTO provided that presumption of validity, it's not like I'm just making wild-ass, unvalidated claims.

However, if I wield my patent too aggressively and start using it to threaten growers of apple trees and fig trees, I'm no longer acting in good faith to police my patent. I'm now acting in bad faith, and can be sued for malicious patent prosecution. Such countersuits are rare, and the odds of winning them are slim. But as this recent decision shows, it's not impossible to win.

For some time there have been proposals to change the US patent system so that the loser pays costs. Thus, even if I acted in good faith, I would still have to pay your court costs if I lost. You can imagine why litigation attorneys are opposed to this approach.

Re:It's difficult, but possible to countersue a tr

[WhiskeyJuvenile]

I'd take issue with labeling Amazon a troll, given that they're practicing their invention.

A Silly and Dangerous Feature

[GameboyRMH]

For anyone who might seriously not know what the one-click feature is for, it's the impulse buying button. Someone sees something they think is AWESOME, they say "Whoa I gotta have that!" and hastily hit the one-click-purchase button. The idea is that the customer won't go through the lengthy ordeal of cancelling the order afterwards. I'm sure there are people dumb enough to fall for such a silly tactic, but I was very careful to make sure I had it turned OFF when this feature was implemented. And even now it sits on the right hand side of my Amazon pages waiting to be turned on. I'd like it turned off thank you very much, as I'd like to review my order carefully before placing it, and I'd hate to accidentally click on it (a real possibility with a pesky laptop touchpad) while taking a look at a PS3, high-end gaming system, or fancy new smartphone.

It's a silly gimmick, but it must be making money for Amazon to go through this much trouble over it.