Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ninth Anniversary of Amazon 1-Click Injunction

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the oh-the-times-we've-had dept.

theodp writes "Nine years ago Monday, Amazon kicked off the Holiday Season by slapping Barnes and Noble with a court injunction barring BN from using a checkout feature that Amazon said represented illegal copying of its patented 1-Click technology. 'We're pleased that Judge Pechman recognized the innovation underlying our 1-Click feature,' said Jeff Bezos in a press release. But an Appellate Court wasn't quite as impressed with Amazon's innovation. Nor were USPTO Examiners who were asked to take another look at the merits of Amazon's 1-Click patent claims. Still, 1-Click lives on, although Amazon's lawyers are currently fighting two separate rejections by USPTO Examiners, burying USPTO Examiners in paper, and employing canceling-and-refiling tactics that some may find reminiscent of Eddie Haskell's chess end-game strategy. So much for Amazon-led patent reform."

4 of 68 comments (clear)

  1. Bilski by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2, Informative

    Doesn't the Bilski decision make Amazon's chances on appeal/re-exam pretty much dead?

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    1. Re:Bilski by brianosaurus · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's more or less the point. Amazon's lawyers are using sleazeball tactics to stall the verdict at this point. As long as they keep shoving new briefs at the court, the examination will never end. I don't understand why they keep fighting it.

      Perhaps its so deeply rooted in the Amazon legal department that they just don't want to give up. I'm sure being a total pain-in-the-ass is a full time job for at least a couple of lawyers, so if they give up the fight, they are out of a job. The licensing fees Amazon receives on this (Apple licenses 1-click for their online store, and I assume there must be other suckers) must be more than its costing them to drag out the inevitable, or else this makes no business sense either.

      As for Bezos, it makes him look like a fool. On the one hand he's fighting for patent reform, while in the other he holds one of the most absurd patents ever granted. If he'd give up on this one, perhaps people would take his call for reform a bit more seriously. Was this the first patent he ever received? Maybe he has a sentimental attachment to it, like a woobie. Grow up, stick a copy in a scrapbook and let it go, Jeff.

      --
      blog
  2. Re:Bad link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I agree, and the chess game reference was buried in that horrid formatting. As a public service, this AC will save others the trouble of digging through that link and explain the joke here:

    When Eddie Haskell saw that he was about to lose the game of chess, he would upend the board and claim it was an accident. As such, he would claim that the game is not over and they would need to start again. This parallels Amazon's attempts at withdrawing and resubmitting their appeal when they sense that they are losing, thereby restarting the process.

    Ironically, my AC post will also be buried in this thread most likely...

  3. Re:Customer Backlash? by symbolic · · Score: 2, Informative

    I haven't given Amazon a dime. And convenient or not, it's going to stay that way. I'm not going to feed the trolls that are mocking and destroying true innovation.