Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patent Reformers O'Reilly, Bezos Mum on 1-Click

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the tails-between-their-legs dept.

theodp writes "Brought together 7 years ago by a threatened boycott over Amazon's 1-Click patent, Tim O'Reilly and Jeff Bezos vowed to reform the U.S. patent system. So in The Register's Open Season podcast (@12:25), Andrew Orlowski finds it very ironic that news of a victory by LOTR choreographer Peter Calveley against Bezos' 1-Click patent broke as O'Reilly was once again busy trotting out Amazon-tied speakers to headline a Web 2.0 conference, this one sponsored by Fenwick & West, the prestigious law firm bested by Calveley. Orlowski notes that O'Reilly, who now counts Bezos among his investors, was oddly silent for a self-described software patent protester, especially one who once vowed to torpedo 1-Click. Equally untalkative was Bezos, who deflected questions on the damage done by Calveley's DIY legal effort, telling a Wall Street analyst to 'refer to our public filings' (although nothing on the subject appears in the 8-K and 10-Q filings). One last dose of irony — in explaining the prior art he used to reject the 1-Click claims, a USPTO Examiner cited the very same TV remote control patent that was deemed to be unsuitable in a 1-Click prior art contest run by the O'Reilly and Bezos-bankrolled BountyQuest (just last year, Amazon testified to Congress that the contest failed to find prior art for Bezos' patent)."

4 of 48 comments (clear)

  1. Money! It's a gas! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looks like O'Reilly thought selling books was more important than patent issues...

  2. just don't buy from them by m2943 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know what is going on with these guys; maybe they had good intentions, maybe they had some sleazy master plan from the beginning.

    Good thing is: you don't have to buy from them. There are plenty of alternatives to both Amazon and O'Reilly, run by people that don't have such a cloud hanging over them.

  3. The patent system needs reform by Cracked+Pottery · · Score: 3, Insightful
    There are too many obvious patents awarded. The system requires a good deal of money to establish and defend a patent. Patents are granted in some fields for an unreasonably long period of time compared the rate of discovery in the field. Software and drug patents are good examples.


    Given the above, many patents obstruct progress instead of encouraging it. They generate business for lawyers who get paid always by the hour and not on contingency. I think the legal abuse of intellectual property law is more costly than tort abuse.


    Patents and copyrights should be used for their Constitutional purpose, and not to provide monopoly rents to entities that can afford the costs to protect them.

  4. what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the original description is completely incomprehensible