Slashdot Mirror
Troll Patents Lists In Databases, Sues Everyone
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "A Florida patent troll called Channel Intelligence is suing everyone from Lemonade to Remember the Milk for infringing on patent 6,917,941, which covers storing a wishlist in a database. Amazon and eBay are absent from the list of targets, even though they very likely store users' wishlists in a database. With any luck, perhaps one of the defendants will get to use that precedent PJ found the other day from In re Lintner, which said, '[c]laims which are broad enough to read on obvious subject matter are unpatentable even though they also read on non-obvious subject matter.'"
The problem is that the patent troll gets to pick the court. Which means that they can slant it any way they want to. From judges that are pro-patents to judges that have no idea what the issue is and don't feel like educating themselves.
There are good judges out there. There are bad judges out there.
The trolls get to choose which ones they want to have their cases decided by.
posting anonymous for obvious reasons.. My Company uses Channel Intelligence to test the conversion rate on various checkout flows. We pay them $20,000 to test 6 flows on our major site, and if they increase conversion by a few percentage points on one of the flows, they get a $10,000 bonus. We have been working with them for a few months now, and I must say, I could have done this in my sleep.
Now this company has climbed past utter ridiculousness with this patent on "lists in a database". Who are they going to sue next, the publisher of a book on basic database algorithms?
More likely: Channel Intelligence isnâ(TM)t prepared to litigate against Amazon, who would likely lawyer CI into the ground over this âoepatent.â
CI most likely wants to get bought by Amazon, and then Amazon can sue everybody over this patent; the patent is quite complementary to their "one click" invention.
from the comments of TFA:
http://www.peertopatent.org/
A joint project with the USPTO and NYU Law School that tries to public input on pending patents. Interesting and potentially very good idea.
Newegg had this in early December 2001, before the date.
I just wonder... Could the small companies pool their resources and contest the patent in one single case, putting the small cases on hold (because the patent is being challenged)?
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
So I read the patent and that's exactly what they did. The abstract just describes a relational database in incredibly convoluted language. The mind reels.
Well, if they can get away with that, then my new patent is going to make me richer than God. I propose storing and manipulating information by reducing it to a set of states, said states being either "something" or "nothing" I propose these states be represented by two differing digits, "1" or "0".
Now, who's got my check?
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
IAALS (I am a law student), so my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt. That said, the summary understates the breadth of this patent. It covers not merely wishlists, but any database storing lists. The description deals with wishlists and e-commerce, but the claims cover lists in a broad fashion.
On the upside for the infringement defendants in this case, there is a joint infringement problem with the claims in the client/server architecture. Infringing this patent would effectively require two entities to take action - one on the client, and one on the server. This "joint" requirement precludes the possibility of any actual infringement, and is indicative of a poorly drafted claim. Combined with the likelihood that the patent will be invalidated as anticipated or obvious in view of all the prior art out there, it's highly unlikely an infringement judgment will ever go through. However, the defendants are likely to settle to avoid the cost of litigation - classic patent troll strategy.
I think there is space in the legal representation market for a law firm that defends obviously baseless cases like this in exchange for the opportunity to sue for legal fees.
The defendant would never gain, but they would never have to pay legal fees either. Lawyers like it, patent trolls hate it, and it helps out the small online businessman.
Any thoughts?
It's likely that one of them will have the money and legal prowess to fight the good fight. Not to mention, it seems like this would be a sure-fire win for anyone willing to fight it. Counter-sue for legal fees anyone?
I happen to know the CEO and founder of one of the companies they're suing. If they're thinking he'll roll over they are in for a rude awakening. I look forward to the show!
http://clightnirish.wordpress.com/
I'm posting because your argument deserves a reply. I completely agree with you. I do wonder, however, if Channel Intelligence is just a dummy corporation for one of the large corporations they aren't suing. Or worse, they, like SCO, might be a puppet organization.
Not to mention, it seems like this would be a sure-fire win for anyone willing to fight it
You seem to have too much trust in the judicial system.
We've been sent a notice by a large American credit card company. The patent is for something that other credit card companies have been doing for a long time. But, they are not going after them. They are going after smaller companies like us.
To fight this patent would cost us about a half-million dollars plus the time spent in court. We can pay them about 100,000/year and keep our business alive. Guess which option a sane businessman would choose?
The legal system in this country is a joke.
Patents are supposed to protect an inventor from others stealing his invention--not his ideas. If you're non-specific about the METHOD by which your "invention" pushes a wish-list to a database (some proprietary programming or a new custom protocol), then you don't have anything to patent.
Unfortunately, the patent office knows only how to patent physical devices and they fail to understand the difference between the broad concept and the actual methodology.
Ignorant backwoods judges and juries don't understand either. That's why trolls love Marshall, TX.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...