Slashdot Mirror


Patent Issued Covering Phone Notifications of Delivery Time and Invoice Quantity

eldavojohn writes: The staggering ingenuity of the U.S. Patent system has again been showcased by the EFF's analysis of recent patents. This week's patent and follow-up patent cover the futuristic innovative idea that when you order something, you can update your order and add additional amounts to your order while it's being processed. But wait, it gets even more innovative! You may one day be able to even to notify when you would like it delivered — on your phone! I know, you're busy wiping all that brain matter off your screen as your head seems to have exploded. Well, it turns out that inventor and patent holder Scott Horstemeyer (aka Eclipse IP, LLC of Delray Beach, FL) found no shortage of targets to go after with his new patents. It appears Tiger Fitness (and every other online retailer) was sending notices to customers about shipments. Did I mention Horstemeyer is a lawyer too? But not just a regular lawyer, a "SUPER lawyer" from the same firm that patented social networking in 2007, sued Uber for using location finding technologies in 2013 and sued Overstock.com as well as a small time shoe seller for using shipping notifications in 2014. A related article at Vox makes this case: "The primary problem with the patent system is, well, the patent system. The system makes it too easy to get broad, vague patents, and the litigation process is tilted too far toward plaintiffs. But because so many big companies make so much money off of this system, few in Congress are willing to consider broader reforms."

9 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. Prior Art by RabidReindeer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does this conflict with my patent for sending a message to mom asking when supper's ready?

  2. Re:What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not gonna happen. I can demonstrate prior fart.

  3. nc by Falos · · Score: 2

    "Imaginary property".

    nuff said

  4. Re:Prior Art by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 2

    I hold the patent on using your phone to complain to your husband that the kids are behaving poorly. We should start a company together.

  5. Re:Prior art by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or, he filed the patent years ago, and then filed a series of updates to it. Each update delays the final "approval date" and allows him to modify the patent. Over time, he can craft a vague sounding patent and/or one that covers existing technology. Then, his "prior art date" is from a year before when he INITIALLY filed the patent. So while the final patent might have been considered innovative if filed as-is on the initial filing date, patent trolls abuse the "update" system to draw their patents out until they are hard to beat via prior art.

    Or, even more likely, the patent examiners said "We'll approve this and let the courts sort it out." Meanwhile, the courts are likely to say "Well, the patent examiners wouldn't have approved this if it wasn't a valid patent."

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  6. Re:Inventions vs. Engineering by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 2

    It is a shame that the patent office views patents applications as a source of income, so they don't want to discourage patent applications by rejecting them.

    It would be interesting to see the percent rejections over time.

  7. "Small time" shoe seller? by Theaetetus · · Score: 2
    From the linked article:

    Shoes for Crews, which makes skid-proof soles for workers who toil on slippery surfaces, has sold millions of pairs of shoes to workers at McDonald’s, KFC, Taco Bell, P.F. Chang’s, Ruth’s Chris Steak House and other restaurant chains. The company says its secret formula makes the stickiest soles on the market, but Shoes for Crews refuses to file for a patent, fearing the process would reveal valuable clues to rivals

    Not really a small shoe store as Subby implied, but rather, a manufacturer and wholesaler which, according to LinkedIn, has between 200-500 employees. So, it's more like "patent troll sues multi-million dollar company", but that doesn't really get as much sympathy.

  8. Re:Prior art by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or, he filed the patent years ago, and then filed a series of updates to it. Each update delays the final "approval date" and allows him to modify the patent. Over time, he can craft a vague sounding patent and/or one that covers existing technology. Then, his "prior art date" is from a year before when he INITIALLY filed the patent. So while the final patent might have been considered innovative if filed as-is on the initial filing date, patent trolls abuse the "update" system to draw their patents out until they are hard to beat via prior art.

    Simple fix for that would be that any time an update is submitted that date becomes the new intial filing date of the patent. The better fix would be to get patent examiners who actually do their jobs and investigate and think about whether a patent should really be granted instead of jsut spending 5 minutes on it.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  9. Re:Prior art by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These IP trolls usually calculate how much it would cost for their victims to fight the patent, win or lose, then make a settlement offer slightly below that.

    IMHO, the patent system isn't flawed, it's the lackluster way patent offices grant new patents.
    They should be held accountable for bad patents.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?