Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Gift Ordering Patent Revoked In EU
Elektroschock writes "The Amazon gift ordering patent was revoked by the European Patent Office. In a press release they write: 'The so-called 'Gift Order Patent' has been revoked by the EPO in an opposition proceeding today after a hearing involving three opposing parties and the patent proprietor, Amazon Inc. The patent relates to a method for purchasing goods over the Internet to be sent as gifts.' Santa did not have to lodge opposition against the patent. The opponents were Fleurop, the FFII and the German computer science society. What strikes me is that so many parties were infringing upon the patent, and yet you need very few organizations to file an opposition. Why are not more patents opposed?"
Amazon in the US must be more on the ball with their gifts to the patent office.
I think it's fairly obvious why so few patents are challenged. It requires an investment of time and money which isn't worth it if you can fly under the radar. And even when you do choose to make that investment there's never any guarantee that the decision will go your way.
What strikes me is that so many parties were infringing upon the patent, and yet you need very few organisations to file an opposition. Why are not more patents opposed?
Well, Everyone is sure that Someone will do it. Anyone could have done it, but Noone did it in the end. Someone was angry because it's Everyone's job. Everyone thought that Anyone could have done it, but Noone realized that Noone will end up doing it. In the end, Everyone was angry at Someone because Noone did what Anyone could've done.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Maybe the patent offices all over the world should take notice and improve their procedures? Some patents are actually not that bad, but some are too broad or for things already invented. Since the patent office workers not always have the knowledge necessary to figure out what a patent really is about they often grant patents instead of doing a more thorough analysis by using experts. And then there are patents written in a language that can't be penetrated by anyone else than advanced lawyers.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
It's expensive.
You may not win.
And it's not just you that benefits. If I oppose a patent and get it removed, then not only can I use that patent but so can everybody else.
will they revoke the world domination patent?
http://pttbt.ca/2007/11/22/amazon-sneaks-world-domination-past-patent-office.html
Please correct your links about FFII Europe:
http://ffii.org/
http://eupat.ffii.org/07/12/amazon07/
AFFII is for United States
http://www.affii.org/ is for the United States.
FFII vs Amazon: add a computer, and the EPO will give you software patents
http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-23571/ffii-vs-amazon:add-a-computer-and-the-epo-will-give-you-software-patents
FFII Vs Amazon: EPO practice is no legal foundation
http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-26032/ffii-vs-amazon:epo-practice-is-no-legal-foundation
July 2005: The Grinch Who Patented Christmas.
...Is that when the Elks make trouble for you?
companies lose nothing when their patents are revoked.
there should be severe patent-related consequences for those whose patents have been revoked (3 during last year, 5 during last 2 years, 10 during last 10 years, or whatever) - e.g. banning the company from filing patents for some period of time, or voiding the rest of their patents.
that might make the filers think before they try to impede everyone's effort to innovate.
are made by ants standing on the shoulders of giants.
The EU comission are good for preventing the USA from "trying" to rule the EU.
The answers to the question are fairly straightforward:
1. The US doesn't have an 'opposition' system, where you can make your claims before a court to oppose the patent. All you can do is (first pay some money) give your evidence to the USPTO, and then go away and hope the applicant can't explain their way around it. Therefore, only European patents can be opposed.
2. A European patent can only be opposed in this fashion within 9 months of it being granted.
3. Other reasons as given above: if I win, it benefits everybody, but if I lose, it costs me greatly. My competition now has a proven good patent, and they know I don't like it. I'll be the first to be sued.
Despite all this, about 1 in 20 EP granted patents are opposed. The US has an opposition system planned as part of the Patent Reform Act of 2007, but it's currently held up before the Senate.
Why this thing isn't challenged.. It has been answered by others already. But there is another aspect which some don't seem to like touching but since I don't really care on stepping on long toes I'll add my 2 cents anyway. A very important aspect is that the EU isn't as anal with regards to patents as the US is. This has been proven time and time again in the past. The best recent example I can come up with is SCO. Where the US actually spend years to come up with some kind of court ruling (its still being questioned/charged/whatever) it got almost instantly laughed out of court in the EU (in fact; SCO was warned that if they'd pull a stunt like that they'd be facing charges of contempt of the court).
No offense to Americans but all the offense I can come up with to the stupid, totally out of control, dimwitted patent bureau's over there. While the intend, to protect people's ideas and rights, is a decent one they seem totally unable to recognize that the whole thing has derailed and doesn't even manage to protect that basic idea. Right now all its being used for is to gain more money by simply patenting whatever stupid things people can think of.
In the States certain stupid things seem to get treated seriously even in court (think SCO), in the EU its being laughed out of court when challenged and proven to be as stupid as it seems. 'nough said. No need to challenge; let the idiots do that themselves in court (why waste money challenging if the idiots will get the bill presented (as SCO has) when they're being proven wrong in court?).
you're not a successful lawyer unless you have 43 billable hours per workday, after all.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
A patent gives the holder the right to defend the patent.
If the patent holder doesn't bother you, why mess with them?
The longer they let it go, the better your chances of defending against a bad patent.
You do run a risk ignoring a strong one.
Why bother? A European patent can only be opposed in this fashion within 9 months of it being granted.
Nobody reads the patent database. Not only is it full of crap, but if you do happen to come across something that you are actually using, then in case of a lawsuit you'd be risking doubling your damages for "willful infringement". These days nobody wants to state the obvious truth that the vast majority of infringed patented ideas are not stolen but reinvented.
So the biggest problem fighting unreasonable patents is that it is expensive and risky?
That can be easily solved.
Lets take a closer look at personal meaning of the word expensive
A private jet would be very expensive to ME, but not to a businessman flying from New York to Tokyo 3 times a month.
Since we have seen that it is expensive to most businesses to fight unreasonable patents due to the cost and risks involved in such an undertaking.
We now only have to find or invent an entity to whom this might not be expensive.
So I propose to form an entity with the sole purpose of fighting unreasonable patents.
This entity needs to maintain it self so it needs funds and what better way to get them then to ask those funds of the people who are bothered by such patents but don't have the time or money to do it by themselves.
I myself don't have the time to start a foundation against unreasonable patents, but since I am in the web development business, I would gladly donate a hundred bucks to a foundation who promices to fight the EOLAS patent, and so would many others.
This foundation would then function as a party that checks and rechecks existing and new patents.
And by doing so functions as a safety net against fuckups of the patent office.
The ultimate result would be that the patent offices would improve on their research and implications of patent requests they receive. Simply because they probably don't like being overruled each time.
At best we would have two organizations competing with each other over the most perfectly suitable patents, thus improving overall usability and validity.
So this way you can fly under the radar for as long as you want while anonymously donating to a foundation to fight that patent.
If it works out for you fine, if it doesn't, then continue flying under the radar.
So if anyone has any time to spend on this?
Some facts about oppositions in the European Patent Office: 1. They must be lodged within 9 months of grant.
2. Anyone can file an opposition, including a "straw man", who is doing it for someone else. So opposing is not admitting infringement see http://www.strawman.info/
3. You do not need to appoint a professional representative; you can do it all yourself.
4. The opposition is decided on the facts as understood by the opposition division of the EPO. Unlike a court case, what is said in the hearing or in the opponents arguments is not decisive. If you file an opposition, present clear prior art, and completely botch the arguments and formalities, you may still win! If there is something that the Opposition Division does not understand, they will ask for clarification.
5. There is no award of costs (save in the event of flagrant abuse of procedure, which is almost unheard-of). So the patent proprietor can turn up with loads of lawyers, and you, the opponent, do not have to pay.
6. There is no come-back against an unsuccessful opponent.
7. An unsuccessfully opposed European patent has no greater legal strength than an unopposed one.
8. If you are only partially successful (you get the patent limited but not revoked) you still cost the patent proprietor money.
9. If you are entirely unsuccessful (but have at lease made a case) you still cost the patent proprietor money.
10. Look at http://www.epo.org/ and you will get good guidance.
Anyone who sees a bad European application being published should watch it, and if is granted and still bad, then oppose the damned thing! The European patent system was designed for this to happen. If the industry ignores bad patents, then the system will not work.
After the nine-month opposition period, the granted patent can still be challenged, but it is much harder and very much more expensive.
HTH
Anonymous European Patent Attorney