Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

USPTO Reaffirms 1-Click Claims 'Old And Obvious'

Posted by timothy on from the wham-wham-wham dept.

theodp writes "After USPTO Examiner Mark A. Fadok rejected Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos' 1-Click Patent claims as 'old and obvious,' Amazon canceled and refiled its 1-Click claims in a continuation application as it requested an Oral Appeal, a move that smacked of a good old-fashioned stalling tactic. But the move may have backfired, as Fadok has just completed his review of the continuation app and concluded that all of the refiled 1-Click claims should be rejected, providing explanations of why the Board of Patent Appeals was wrong to reverse his earlier decision after listening to Amazon's lawyers in September. In October, USPTO Examiner Matthew C. Graham rejected most of the 1-Click claims as part of the reexam requested by LOTR actor Peter Calveley, a decision that attorneys for Amazon are currently trying to work around with some creative wordsmithing. Can't see how all of this means 'less work for the overworked Patent and Trademark Office.'"

80 comments

  1. another win for the lawyers by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hurray!

    Is Amazon really this clueless, or are they just not in control of their lawyers? Are the lawyers just going after whatever they think is billable?

    And does Amazon *really* think that what makes their site so appealing has *NOTHING* to do with 1-Click?

    I really hate it when morons get rich; it just encourages the rest of them. :(

    1. Re:another win for the lawyers by k_187 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given that at least one other business entity has licensed 1-click from amazon (Apple, I don't know if there are others), I'd imagine that this is an attempt to keep that revenue stream open and flowing.

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    2. Re:another win for the lawyers by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given that at least one other business entity has licensed 1-click from amazon (Apple, I don't know if there are others), I'd imagine that this is an attempt to keep that revenue stream open and flowing.

      Given how much Amazon must've spent in legal fees over this thus far, they'd better be making a whole hell of a lot from the licensees to be making a profit.

    3. Re:another win for the lawyers by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Somebody please just shoot this myminicity asshole.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:another win for the lawyers by ILuvRamen · · Score: 1

      who the hell says their site is appealing? You ever been there? lol. Anyway I'm guessing that this is the usual lose the dispute and get fired, win the dispute and get a commission situation for the lawyers. Everyone knows the high level execs basically write an e-mail to the legal department every week that says "To do this week: get us money and don't let anyone take any from us in the meantime" and that's about all they care about.

      --
      Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    5. Re:another win for the lawyers by dieth · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ok guys, I hate the myminicity-com guy too. This is made by a french company called Motion Twin. You can email them at contact@motion-twin.com . This idiots myminicity is called fohootville. Diluge this address, maybe even their http://support.motion-twin.com/ website. With requests that this asshole be tarred/featered, burned at the stake, shot X number of times, where X is the number of posts he's made. And to request the cancellation of his account. I'll probably be trying to troll this message under each of his posts sorry for that :(

    6. Re:another win for the lawyers by NewInput · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know this is going against the grain, but the one-click patent wasn't obvious to me. When I first enabled it on my amazon account and I clicked the link I *didn't expect the transaction to be complete*. I'm a pretty bright software engineer working at a startup, and I honestly didn't comprehend how it worked until I saw it. I assumed that it would be one click followed by a confirmation.

      On reflection, I realized that it was because when looking at how to do an e-commerce system no matter how short you try to make the checkout process you want to include a confirmation. It would be dangerous not to do so. The innovation seems to be that you can order with one-click and then, to make it not dangerous, you can cancel within an hour or so. I don't know whether it's patent-worthy, but it's at least clever to allow error correction after the fact instead of forcing a check before.

    7. Re:another win for the lawyers by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Man, I'm just always relieved it isn't 2 girls 1 cup.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    8. Re:another win for the lawyers by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      Re: but it's at least clever to allow error correction after the fact instead of forcing a check before.

      In our business, customers fax in orders which they can cancel as long as it happens before 4 PM (ship time). You can return goods bought at stores within two weeks if they haven't been opened or are in original condition. There are thousands of examples of this predating computers. This is just a typical example of IP gone bad. In fact, patenting software is like patenting math. It just doesn't make sense. Period.

  2. This makes no fscking sense.. by devjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is a company capable of such awesome technical inginuity (Amazon Web Services) getting hung up on something so utterly ridiculous? This just smacks of leadership that is a cut below the calibre of its employees.

    1. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      This just smacks of leadership that is a cut below the calibre of its employees.

      If by "cut below" you mean "sub-basement" I'd say you're right on the mark.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This just smacks of leadership that is a cut below the calibre of its employees.


      Is there a single case in the entire world that is the converse?

      Incompetent management is pretty much required now in order to create work through inefficiency during the slow collapse in capitalism we are seeing.

      If not for idiot managers who like to see everything done incorrectly at least three times before the job is done right, then many of us simply would be out of work.

      Intelligence, knowledge, wisdom, skill and efficiency are NOT desirable qualities in management (in a failing capitalist democracy).

      Be glad all our managers are idiots, it makes work for us.
    3. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is a company capable of such awesome technical inginuity (Amazon Web Services) getting hung up on something so utterly ridiculous?
      Amazon is in a very competitive market that centers around their Web site. Every little thing that they can keep their competitors from being able to use on competing ecom sites is a win for Amazon, and they have the money to waste on the little stuff.

      Like Wal*Mart, Amazon is responsible for destroying a large part of many cities independent retailers because although many people talk a strong talk about supporting a healthy local economy by frequenting small businesses, most of these same people will jump to save $2 on a $30 purchase by buying through these faceless uncaring mega corporations.

      So really, while we rile against the practices of companies like Amazon and Wal*Mart, we rarely actually put our money where our mouths are.

      When you shop at book sellers like Powell's World of Books, you may pay a little bit more, but you're supporting a healthy business model that is centered around both the employee and customer, instead of lining Jeff Bezo's pocket even more.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    4. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by IronicCheese · · Score: 1

      This makes plenty of fscking sense when you remember that the company is large and only some of them are morons. Companies act a lot less monolithically than most people imagine.

    5. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Handover+Phist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Three words: Mod Parent Up. This behavior, and the backlash to big box stores, have been pretty obvious to the observer since the advent of the supermarket. As an aside though, Jeff Bezo is probably paying his employees fairly and paying a whackload of taxes to boot.

      Disclaimer: As a Canucklehead I know extremely little about American corporate law other than someone will eventually get screwed when a CEO siphons off a billion dollars of company money to buy ridiculous crap.

    6. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Companies act a lot less monolithically than most people imagine.

      Yes, but a lot more moronically.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your local books/electronics depository isn't making enough money, perhaps said business needs to switch to a more efficient business model. If said business cannot compete, perhaps it's a sign that the business should concentrate on finding a niche not occupied by the big fish.

    8. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by MushMouth · · Score: 1

      This is simply not true. In many ways Amazon has increased the business of your local book seller, your local USED bookseller should be offering their used books on Amazon.

      BTW I hear this statement that Amazon has killed local book stores repeated, yet when I actually look at statistics, number of shops open today vs those open 10 years ago, in San Francisco, there are MORE open today than there were 10 years ago. Most of the ones currently open were open then.

    9. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by SuperBanana · · Score: 1

      Why is a company capable of such awesome technical inginuity (Amazon Web Services) getting hung up on something so utterly ridiculous? This just smacks of leadership that is a cut below the calibre of its employees.

      One word: investors. Investors see patents as very, very valuable assets to be defended. If you defend an absurd patent, you have a chance at $xy million dollars. If you simply say "LOL J/K!" and walk away, you've got a guaranteed loss of $xy million dollars. Yeah, you waste the salary of a couple lawyers, but...that's so small to the perceived value of the patent that investors are willing to take that risk.

      Big investors get voting rights or board seats, and- something most slashdotters don't realize- the officers of a corporation usually serve at the pleasure of the board.

      When a CEO leaves a position to "spend more time with their family" or "for health reasons" or "retires", it's almost always because either the board gave them the boot, or he/she knew they were about to be given it...

      --
      Please help metamoderate.
    10. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know the San Francisco isn't the center of the fucking world? In fact in a lot of ways, it's not even on this fucking planet.

    11. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Incompetent management is pretty much required now in order to create work through inefficiency during the slow collapse in capitalism we are seeing. If not for idiot managers who like to see everything done incorrectly at least three times before the job is done right, then many of us simply would be out of work. Intelligence, knowledge, wisdom, skill and efficiency are NOT desirable qualities in management (in a failing capitalist democracy). Be glad all our managers are idiots, it makes work for us.


      A pity I've used all my mod points, that is darn insightful. But I must offer one small correction, the US is not a democracy -- it's a "democratic republic", a form of representative government which incorporates some features of a democracy. The most commonly seen pure democracy would be a lynch mob, which is why the founding fathers devised the system they did. Not a bad system really, but it requires a tad better than rampant apathy and cynicism to to make it work for us.

      Now Corporate America, they really know how to use representative government, so they get excellent results. Maybe some day "we the people" will wake up to the power of that example and reclaim our rightful place as the true citizens of this land...and demote capitalism from the official religion of the US to it's proper, original, status of economic tool.

      Deprogammers Needed!
      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    12. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      Yep, we do know -- that's why we live there and just visit y'all for the holidays!

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    13. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      This is simply not true. In many ways Amazon has increased the business of your local book seller
      Used booksellers may be able to sell a few more titles on Amazon, but it's not going to float them when Amazon takes all their new book sales, and drives the price of used books into the range of pennies of profit.

      Likewise, selling used books on Amazon does not support the local employment rolls.

      In the short term, it's good for consumers, but over time the destruction of local economy these mega-retailers cause results in overall reduction of workers to nothing more than disposable corporate surfs.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    14. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Funny

      bookstores should give away books for free and make money selling tshirts at poetry readings. Or does that only apply to musicians?

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    15. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bookstores should give away books for free and make money selling tshirts at poetry readings. Or does that only apply to musicians?
      That's what Comrade Stallman says...
    16. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+Evil+Couch · · Score: 1

      Likewise, selling used books on Amazon does not support the local employment rolls.
      Sure it does. Those used books aren't going to receive, catalog, store, retrieve, box, mail and bill for themselves.
      --
      The World's Worst Webcomic!
    17. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by dabraun · · Score: 2, Informative

      But I must offer one small correction, the US is not a democracy -- it's a "democratic republic", a form of representative government which incorporates some features of a democracy.


      Actually, the US is a "constitutional republic" - we have a constitution which defines hard boundaries, we have representatives (who represent the public - i.e. republic). Most if not all subregions hold democratic elections to elect their representatives. This is not actually required in the original constitution (later ammendments define who can vote very widely, certainly this was not the case when this country was founded.)
    18. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      But I must offer one small correction, the US is not a democracy -- it's a "democratic republic", a form of representative government which incorporates some features of a democracy.

      That canard is getting old.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    19. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, and I really am a bit tired of delivering it. But so long as there are so many who believe they live in a democracy it still needs to be said.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    20. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by nasch · · Score: 1

      You should realize that there is more than one definition of "democracy", and the US either is or is not a democracy, depending on the definition in use. So you should pin down which definition someone is using before you start telling them they're wrong. I think after you each describe your respective definitions, there won't even be any argument to have. Hm, maybe that is why this keeps going so long. :-)

    21. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by cavebison · · Score: 1

      Simple - the Project Leader of AWS is not the Marketing Director.

    22. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Umm, no. Writers should give away books for free and make money selling tshirts. That is if you want a comparable situation to musicians. However unlike musicians, writers have realized for quite some time it isn't a get rich quick scheme and have been able to survive with their old model in the day of the p2p piracy.

    23. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. Unlike the big-box stores like Home Depot and Walmart, Amazon is actually useful.

      When I was a teen I used to shop at a local store too [no credit card, had to use debit/cash]. And they never EVER stocked any technical books [math, compsci, crypto, etc]. So it was *always* a 4-6 week wait for anything.

      Nowadays I can order a book from my couch [or workstation at work] and have it in my hands in 2-3 days. Not weeks, but days. And that's with their middle of the road shipping option [e.g. ~4-5$ per order].

      Walmart is a shitty store [so is Kmart, Zellers, Target, etc] because of a very simple problem [well many but ...] lack of diversity. They have a million types of products, But within each category they have very limited stock. Like if you want to buy plates for your apartment. They have maybe 2-3 different plates, tops. If you want covers for your bed, same story, etc, etc... They don't actually have a valuable selection [unlike Amazon which has basically anything in the form of book, cd, or dvd]. So when they run the local shops out of town it hurts more. Because local shops are more likely to specialize in a useful capacity.

      I couldn't have cared less when our local bookshop went under. It was a useless store, and all it did was waste my time.

    24. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

      Like Wal*Mart, Amazon is responsible for destroying a large part of many cities independent retailers because although many people talk a strong talk about supporting a healthy local economy by frequenting small businesses, most of these same people will jump to save $2 on a $30 purchase by buying through these faceless uncaring mega corporations.

      OK, so what if your local small bookstore doesn't have what you want? You can certainly have them order it, wait over a week if not two for it to come in, and then pay full price for it. Or you can order it from Amazon.com, get it in 3 days, and when you add in shipping maybe even pay less than it would cost at the local bookstore. You have to be pretty hardcore about supporting local businesses to believe that supporting them in this example is the right thing to do.

      When you shop at book sellers like Powell's World of Books, you may pay a little bit more, but you're supporting a healthy business model that is centered around both the employee and customer, instead of lining Jeff Bezo's pocket even more.

      Now I understand where you are coming from. For those of you who don't know, Powell's is the largest bookstore in the USA and maybe the world. If you want a book, Powell's probably has it in stock. It's kind of like shopping at Amazon.com in person, if they had a store that had everything in it. So you are lucky enough to have the USA's largest bookstore in your back yard that you can support. Good for you. How about those unfortunate people who live in places where they don't even have Borders and Barnes and Noble? Do you still recommend that they pay more and wait longer to get books rather than mail order them? I'd be curious to know if you'd really follow your own advice if you didn't have access to Powell's.

    25. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More importantly, even you missed the fact that what we have in the US is NOT capitalism -- not even close. Capitalism requires that each individual retain 100% (or close to it) of the right to spend their earnings where, when, and how they see fit. That is the "invisible hand" you hear about: the sum collection of individuals choosing voluntarily where, when, and how to invest their wealth. Government eliminates that voluntary choice whereever it is entangled in the economy -- not only by taking wealth by force, but by forcing behavior according to the ideals of the elite few at the top.

      Today in the US, the average citizen is forced to pay upwards of 50% of his yearly earnings to government through federal, state, and local taxes and fees combined, plus various other forced purchases (house insurance for example) which creates artificial markets inflated well beyond the value they would hold otherwise.

      Look at it this way: pure socialism/communism would have individuals retaining 0% of that right. We're at the half-way mark, and now you can see why labeling our economy "capitalist" is much less than truthful. 50% less, to be sure.

      No, what we have today in the US is more appropriately termed corporatism with elements of socialism and fascism thrown in: an rather obvious example of authoritarianism, considering that we're talking about the most expensive, most powerful government that has ever existed.

    26. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      You didn't follow my link, nor do you know what a "canard" is, do you? There's no conflict between being a democracy and being a constitutional republic--it's people like you who spread misunderstanding and ignorance that I'm sick of.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    27. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      Oh, so you think then that the US is a pure democracy? Or that a few democratic features make a democracy? Sorry, you'd best brush up on your poli sci. And no, I did not follow your link. As you seem capable only of baseless criticism I didn't feel much need...probably a lesson in that about "tone". :)

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    28. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Oh, so you think then that the US is a pure democracy? Or that a few democratic features make a democracy? Sorry, you'd best brush up on your poli sci.

      You're the one that needs brushing up. The US is a democracy. The US is also a constitutional republic. The US is not, however, a direct democracy. Not all democracies are direct democracies. Furthermore, I've gone through this routine three or four different times this month alone.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    29. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      You don't say! Maybe you should stop then... I am not interested in a semantic argument, which is what you are attempting. Read and understand:
      http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fed10.htm
      http://www.trimonline.org/website/deceived.htm

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    30. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      You don't say! Maybe you should stop then... I am not interested in a semantic argument, which is what you are attempting.

      Given that the topic of hand is semantics, I'm wondering what kind of argument is better. Perhaps we should discuss football instead?

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    31. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      The print industry is lucky...books take longer to rip AND to burn :D My guess is that the old model will probably thrive for as long as the old technology stays around. Good writers write because they love to write, and musicians are the same. The get-rich-quick-ers exist in both industries, as well as every other industry. Both musicians and writers have it tough because there isn't a large enough middle ground between selling 0 copies and millions to support everybody, and book & record sales aren't related to quality. Rather than accuse the musicians (or writers) of greed, I'd rather look to the throngs of people who haven't realized that there's better stuff out there than the likes of James Patterson or Linkin Park.

    32. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      The discussion is about democracy; but you seem to be attempting to dilute the definition of the word. Not that I blame you, you appear to believe what the neocons want you to believe and all. Trouble is, it's incorrect.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    33. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      BTW, class of '77 here. :) We had real education back then...[sigh]

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    34. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by gregOfTheWeb · · Score: 1

      I'm curious as to what factors you see in the economy that makes you believe we are experiencing a "slow collapse in capitalism we are seeing."

      I think that is rhetoric that has no basis in fact.

      --
      blah
    35. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      "Democracy", in the way that most actual people use the word today, is a term that applies to the American system of government. Now, it is true that this country wasn't much of a democracy when it was founded, since only male landowners could vote. But successive years of reforms changed that. If you'd bothered following my links (which, incidentally, is good form if you're going to provide links of your own), you'd have found this comment I made awhile back:

      Considering that America is both a democracy *and* a constitutional republic, evidently neither do you. A democracy is any system in which the population at large controls (in theory, is) the government. A constitutional system is one in which a specific set of rules, known as the "constitution", limits the authority of the government. A republic is any system of government where (a) there is no monarchy and (b) government officials are supposed to represent some subset of the population.

      Nineteenth-century America is an example of an undemocratic republic--only male landowners could vote originally, though by the current day all adult citizens can vote. Current-day Britain is an example of a democratic, constitutional monarchy--while it is not a republic, there is still an (unwritten) constitution limiting the monarchy (otherwise it would be an absolute monarchy), and democracy exists.

      Furthermore...

      Not that I blame you, you appear to believe what the neocons want you to believe and all.

      Something tells me I'm going to have to add "neocon" to the list of words that have completely lost their meaning. The idea that America is, or should be a democracy dates back to the 19th century, long before neocons even existed.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    36. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      Forgive me for saying so, but the self-referencing links prove nothing but that you believe yourself to be an authority on democracy. I tend to expect a bit more in a discussion...
      The gist of your argument appears to be, "The US is a democracy, and the proof is that I've been saying so for a long time."

      Now, do you see how that doesn't actually work?

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    37. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      No, the gist of my argument is, "you're setting up a false dichotomy." The self-referencing is only because I loathe repeating myself. And the gist of your argument is, "no it isn't, you neocon fascist, here's a link".

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    38. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1
      There is no false dichotomy, read the Federalist Papers and the Constitution yourself. Until you do, you're in over your head.

      And the gist of your argument is, "no it isn't, you neocon fascist, here's a link".


      A link to some text of the Federalist Papers, yes. Slightly more authoritative than your highly-valued personal opinion.

      Now do you get it? :D
      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    39. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      There is no false dichotomy, read the Federalist Papers and the Constitution yourself.

      I have. (I'm also well aware that the Federalist Papers were written for an era and in an era where women and blacks could not vote, and neither could anyone who didn't own any land--if you are seriously advocating returning to that system then please say so openly.) The meanings of words change over time. "Democracy" is one of these words, and the use of the term "democracy" to refer to elected representative governments is well-attested, especially when those governments allow suffrage to all adult citizens, as ours does. At the same time, "representative democracy" is distinguished from "republic"--Great Britain is one, but not the other. The question of which is left as an exercise to the reader.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    40. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      Well, you seem happy with your shifty definition, I guess that's what's important...

      I think I'm done arguing with you now. Anyone who feels that citing his own previous posts is adequate "proof" is probably education-proof.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    41. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      I wasn't citing them as proof, I was citing them to avoid repeating myself--something I told you two posts ago. Until you improve your reading comprehension, though, I think the Federalist Papers will remain somewhat beyond you.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    42. Re:This makes no fscking sense.. by gilboad · · Score: 1

      Sadly enough I spent all my mod points.
      I plan to magnify your post, print it and hang it in my cubicle.

      Call me suicidal, I always wanted to find in, in person, just how long (and cold) do welfare lines get in mid January...

      - Gilboa

  3. In related news... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...the USPTO has implemented this new one-click patent denial system, but due to a software bug, it only grants patents at this time. The workaround involves a few manual steps; click on the "Help" link for more information.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  4. Makes sense to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Why is a company capable of such awesome technical inginuity (Amazon Web Services) getting hung up on something so utterly ridiculous? This just smacks of leadership that is a cut below the calibre of its employees.


    Well, I've had to write code that hits AWS, and I'm not *that* impressed with it. It's a set of Web Services. The documentation isn't particularly good, and the interfaces aren't particularly good. It's decently usable.

    But I also fail to see how this is "utterly ridiculous" as a patent. (Here we go again.) The relevant criterion is "non-obviousness". When Bezos told his programmers to implement "one-click", their first implementation took two clicks: buy, then confirm. So he told them to go do it again. It's gotten a little better since 1999, but at that time, that was the thinking of programmers: you have to confirm everything.

    (Look at the GNOME trash can, even today, for example: it asks you to confirm emptying it, even though the whole point of the trash can itself *is* the confirmation step. Yes, it's confirming my confirmation.)

    Of course, anybody who's read any user interaction books by Alan Cooper knows that confirmation dialogs are stupid, and don't (in general) work. Users build the habit that "operation + confirm" *is* the operation, so the one time in a dozen they don't want to do it, they do anyway, out of habit. This is why Undo was invented -- which is what One-Click allows, in fact. But in 1999, most people still hadn't really understood why Undo was better than Confirm (and many people still don't), and they sure hadn't figured it out with respect to online shopping.

    Finally, if Amazon's programmers are so smart, and if one-click is so obvious, then why did Amazon's own programmers have trouble understanding that something called "one-click" is supposed to take ... one ... click?

    "Theories have four stages of acceptance: i) this is worthless nonsense; ii) this is an interesting, but perverse, point of view; iii) this is true, but quite unimportant; iv) I always said so." -- J.B.S. Haldane, 1963
    1. Re:Makes sense to me by BBandCMKRNL · · Score: 2, Informative

      But I also fail to see how this is "utterly ridiculous" as a patent. (Here we go again.) The relevant criterion is "non-obviousness". When Bezos told his programmers to implement "one-click", their first implementation took two clicks: buy, then confirm. So he told them to go do it again. It's gotten a little better since 1999, but at that time, that was the thinking of programmers: you have to confirm everything. Just because something has never been done on the internet before, doesn't make it "non-obvious".

      One of my grandfather's brothers was a dairy farmer. He could call the feed store and say, "This is John Brown. I need x tons of feed tomorrow." The feed would show up the next day and the cost was added to his account which he paid on a periodic basis.

      This is the non-internet version of 'one-click' ordering. It is "utterly ridiculous" to grant a patent for the Amazon "one-click" ordering.
      --
      Without the 2nd Amendment, the others are just suggestions.
  5. Not all claims were rejected by MushMouth · · Score: 2, Informative

    19 out of 69 claims were originally rejected, not the entire one click patent. So much of the patent is still considered original and non-obvious.

  6. Keep it up Amazon by symbolic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is one reason you haven't received a dime of my money. Hasn't hurt me a bit, because EVERYTHING you sell can be acquired from other places, and from what I've seen, often at better prices.

  7. At first if you do not succeed try again! by 47001foo · · Score: 1

    I say, if you do not succeed with 1-click try for double-click and try and make more $$$.

  8. Tag "sudden outbreak of common sense" by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 1

    NT

    1. Re:Tag "sudden outbreak of common sense" by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Just remember that tags can't have spaces in them, so tag it suddenoutbreakofcommonsense

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  9. wow, just WOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    69 claims for one lick?

  10. Here's a question for any patent lawyers ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given the importance that Amazon places upon this particular patent, how many times can Amazon keep going back to the USPTO to get their patent reviewed? At some point, is the patent just ruled invalid, or can they keep this in limbo forever?

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  11. How about this new patent-related law... by Jugalator · · Score: 1

    If a company has a patent rejected and it even seems abusive to the system, they'll risk a penalty of not being able to get *any* patent through for some time period. Just so this idiocity is actually *felt* by the company so clearly abusing the system and trying to sneak things in. It would be a nail in the coffin for companies that are pretty much founded with this idea as their business model! It doesn't have to be much, but enough so it's felt and companies need to think things through before taking risks with overly stupid patents.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  12. Support the local economy? by johannesg · · Score: 3, Informative

    Do the math with me, will you? Let's say I want to buy the OpenGL Programming Guide. My local bookstore has it for 60 euro (http://www.selexyz.nl/pages/detail_v2/S1/10030001940805-2-10090000000010.aspx?showbreadcrumb=1, or I can order from Amazon for $50 (http://www.amazon.com/OpenGL-Programming-Guide-Official-Learning/dp/0321481003/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198653310&sr=8-1). That's only 35 euro, or almost half what I pay at the local bookstore. Shipping cost is a bit harder to determine, but for me to travel by bike + train + fairly long walk to the above-mentioned bookstore will also cost me 11 euro, plus 3-4 hours. And these price differences are fairly normal for this type of book.

    How about pockets, then? I can buy a single Harry Potter book in english for 17 euro, or in dutch for 20 euro (http://www.selexyz.nl/pages/search_v2/S2/SEARCHRESULTPRODUCTS.aspx). Or I can go to Amazon and buy six Harry Potter books for $34 (http://www.amazon.com/Harry-Potter-Paperback-Box-Books/dp/0439887453/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198653687&sr=1-2). That's 24 euro - almost the price of a single book locally!

    I'd love to support my local bookstore, but they *really* have to do better than this to compete. For years we were told that because of the strong dollar, import books were simply expensive. Now that the dollar is weak they don't use the excuse anymore, but we still pay through the nose for books.

    1. Re:Support the local economy? by berashith · · Score: 1

      the books in the US still have the price in Canadian dollars printed on them at nearly double the US price, even though parity has been achieved.

    2. Re:Support the local economy? by TXG1112 · · Score: 1

      That's because they need to pay for the translation into Canadian. :)

      --
      I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
  13. Less work by Dr.Altaica · · Score: 1

    Well if they are geting less done they are obliously doing less work.

  14. All UNCANCELED Claims Were Rejected by theodp · · Score: 1

    Claims 1-48 were dropped in the continuation application and claims 49-68 were just rejected.