USPTO Rejects Amazon's One-Click Patent

igdmlgd writes "A while ago I filed a reexamination request for the Amazon.com one-click patent and recently checked out the USPTO online file wrapper -it seems they have rejected all the claims I requested they look at and more!" And it only took many many years to remove what would have been obvious to the most incompetent web developer.

Comments

Register Article

[stoolpigeon]

here is the printer friendly version of an article with some good info. about this over at the Register.

Re:Register Article

[PatentMagus]

When a previous patent is used for a 102 (novelty) rejection it does not mean that the invention was already patented, only that it was disclosed. It is patented only if it is claimed by the prior patent. Usually, the rejection is based on the prior patent's specification but not it's claims. Sorry, haven't researched deeply enough to see what was claimed in the prior art for one-click.

Also, "copyright attaches when pen goes to paper". What you meant was that a good way to keep the obvious from being patented is is to have an expression of the idea published published first. The prior art has to be published and available. It also helps if the published work is a printed one. I'm currently trying to get some videos admitted as prior art, but am not sure how it will go.

Not quite...

[theantipop]

There was a non-final rejection mailed on October 9. There is still at least one more round of prosecution before Amazon's lawyers decide to choose any number of paths to continue prosecution beyond a final rejection.

Re:Counter sue?

[jcr]

Chances are that anyone who's paid up for a license from Amazon is SOL, since the contract would almost certainly include a provision that they can't sue even if the patent ends up getting spiked. Anyone who hasn't executed a contract with Amazon, but has incurred expenses in defending themselves might be able to recover some damages.

-jcr

Patent was for a result, not a process or design

[ThinkThis]

This patent was for a result rather than a process or a design. The concept of "1-click" just means better performance. It would be like giving Car company a patent on a 70 MPG car, or Starbucks a patent on getting $5.00 bucks for a cup of coffee.

Re:Huh?

[PlatyPaul]

Here you go. It's a decent summary of the situation, albeit not the most in-depth.

You can take a look at the original patent, too, but that would require a second click.

Re:Whine enuf and you win

[IBitOBear]

Actually it was extremely obvious. It was also considered an extremely bad idea. Anybody who has ever mis-clicked anything will know why it is a bad idea if they take a moment to generalize their knowledge.

Its a bad idea for exactly the same reason that most erase features of most operating systems erase to a clipboard or a trash folder of some sort.

See, people click on and mis-operate all sorts of things in all sorts of circumstances.

Amazon is simply big and slow enough to be able to afford to do a ship-and-return or a block-that-order action when the customer screws up. It was also well-funded enough that it could operate at a loss for something like three years from startup and not die outright.

Smaller, more responsive, less funded business would have gone bankrupt long ago. And such businesses could never have survived under the onslaught of "I didn't order this $3,000.00 flat screen so you credit back my card immediately and I'll get this back to you once you send me a shipping label" type calls.

One Click Shopping is bad business in most uses, so people didn't design their web pages that way till the "big players" came in with a lot of financial ballast.

"Do it in fewer steps" (e.g. in one step, e.g. without asking "are you sure") is _always_ obvious and is almost _never_ implemented because people screw up. And when it is implemented someone usually gets fired because its hard to teach people that they _should_ slow down and double check before they do something (a) expensive, (b) irreversible, or (c) embarrassing.

Consider: Didn't you think to double-check that order before you just (a) fired the nuke, (b) ordered a whole shipping container of toilet paper for a one-stall bathroom, (c) sold off the entire calculator division of HP, (d) fired everyone in human resources. (etc.)