Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PayPal Accuses Google of Poaching Mobile Payment Trade Secrets, Personnel

Posted by timothy on from the department-of-human-resources dept.

jhernik writes with a selection from eWeek Europe's short story on a snag facing Google's new mobile payment system: "PayPal, eBay's payment service, has sued Google over its new Google Wallet service, accusing the search engine of poaching trade secrets for use in its mobile payment service. The suit, filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court just hours after Google unveiled its Wallet payments sheme, alleges that two key executives who created the near-field communication (NFC) service used company secrets about mobile payments to fashion its own service."

4 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. Dear Paypal... by realityimpaired · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Prior Art... Cellphone-based mobile payment options have been available in Japan, India, even Kenya for years... some of these services have been available since before PayPal existed. And if that isn't enough of a prior art for a portable mobile payment system using an electronic network, I have an Interac card and a Visa I'd like to show them... the Interac network has existed since before the Internet (as it is today) existed, ditto Visa's electronic transaction network.

    It is basic electronic security... beyond that, all you need is a unique user ID and a way to bill that user ID back to the customer. Giving somebody a unique account number isn't exactly a trade secret: banks have been doing that for as long as banks have existed. Putting a password/PIN on that isn't exactly a trade secret: that's been done in computer science for almost as long as computers have existed. How is any of what they're doing a trade secret?

    1. Re:Dear Paypal... by jhoegl · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There do seem to be an increasing number of companies jumping on the anti-google wagon.

      I like Google because of their search engine, I use their gmail because it is efficient for personal things and their anti spam is very good.
      I use the front page to pull feeds from other sites and get a quick glance at things.
      I use Android based phones because I like their business model.
      But if Google ever does me wrong, I will find alternatives.
      Businesses really dont have to try this hard to smear Google, eventually they will buckle under their own weight or because some idiot will get into a position they shouldnt be in and make a decision that harms the consumer. I know this is an inevitability, so do most smart consumers. Let it go companies, right now you just look petty.

    2. Re:Dear Paypal... by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How did we get to the point where using ideas - ANY ideas (apart from "how to kill" ideas), is ever considered wrongdoing?

      We've managed to make illegal the very process that allowed human culture to develop in the first place.

      --
      This space available.
  2. Re:Fuck Paypal. by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Checks are far, far too costly.

    There's nothing stopping someone from sending you a bad check. What happens if you cash it? Your bank charges you a bounced-check fee, not them, YOU. (And yes, their bank changes them a fee too.)

    Why do you think just about every retail place has stopped accepting checks now? They're inherently a bad system, and the cost of dealing with a bad check is too high.

    When you're selling old shit on Ebay or Craigslist or whatever, a $30 bad-check charge will eat up your profits for several items, not just that one. It just isn't worth it.

    On top of that, it's too slow. It takes several days for stuff to arrive in the mail, but you also don't know how prompt the buyer is in paying for his shit; some of them sit on it for days before paying. Then you have to wait 10 days for the check to clear before you can send their stuff. Meanwhile, they're bitching because it's taking 3 weeks for them to get their item. And what if something goes wrong? What if the buyer didn't pay at all? This is very, very common on Ebay for some reason: I'd guess that fully 5% of buyers never pay for their items. This number isn't pulled out of my ass, it's what happened to me when I sold all my old Transformers on Ebay a few months ago. With Paypal-only payments, you file an unpaid item dispute, and if payment doesn't show up on Paypal in 1 day, then you re-list and void the old transaction. With checks and the USPS, you have to wait a week or two.

    Sending a check would be fine if the vast majority (like 99.99%) of buyers were honest, but they're not.