Slashdot Mirror
Patent Reformers O'Reilly, Bezos Mum on 1-Click
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)."
Looks like O'Reilly thought selling books was more important than patent issues...
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.
Unfortunately, that seems to tell a lot.
Money and common sense (and/or ethics) just seem to be strangely opposed... Why am I (not) surprised?
Retracting your common sense/ethics arguments because you find yourself in "debt" to money-makers just looks cheap, doesn't it?
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.
the original description is completely incomprehensible
I also think No Starch Press makes some good books.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Book Burro (bookburro.org) is a Firefox extension that would give you prices of books at other sites when browsing Amazon (or vice versa). (It's down right now, but I believe it's still available.)