Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Sues B&N over Software Patent
TuneUp writes "Amazon is suing Barnes and Noble over it's 1-Click "technology" which allows you to enter your credit info only once, then shop to your hearts content. Time to see if these ridiculous patents will hold up. " We reported on
the patent a few weeks ago. By far my favorite bit is how this feature took "Thousands of Hours" to implement. I'm having a really hard time with this patent, since to a computer saving your VISA number and shipping address is no different then saving, say, your Slashdot Nickname and preferred threshold. Well, except one probably ought to be a bit more secure...
..We run a similar technology on our very large and extensive e-commerce solution which might be a viable competitor to Amazon and B&N....uh or something....so is it really one click technology that is copyrighted/patented/trademarked (whatever) is it the cookies. Because that is basically all it is doing anyways right? I think I will patent the one click get your email idea and make millions sueing someone........
Funny and I thought Perl == Paid employment recently located
A thousand hours really isn't that much if you do some math. Say ten programmers workings a month. This gives you about 1,600 hours. Techincally that's "thousands of hours". Yes it sounds bogus, and I don't think it nessecarily took that long. Although testing, documenting you did the testing, get it all signed off, developing requirements, etc is much much easier with a ten person company opposed to a 50+ person company.
-cpd
Amazon have to do SOMETHING to stay in the headlines, cuz their bottom line is getting attention for all the wrong reasons.
"Look! We have another reason to sink yet more VC into us!".
Bah. Turn a profit, why don't you?
--
Peter
I really hope they lose. Their One-Click technology is nothing more than the use of cookies in a somewhat secure fashion, possibly coupled with some data storage on their computer. It would be really nice if the courts come out with a major statement on this regarding how silly these software patents really are.
-- Error: Cannot find file REALITY.SYS - Universe halted, please reboot!
Isn't it true that if you can show examples of people using the idea being patented before the patent went through, that it's really a very simple matter to have the patent thrown out?
As the recent Slashdot Article on Patents (and subsequent comments) pointed out, patent defense is a risk: if the judge decides the "infringement" is not actually infringing on any IP at all, then the patent is rendered worthless.
Let's hope the judge is sensible in this case.
Seriously, though, I have the feeling the patent will hold up, for no better reason than it's there and so somebody passed it, proving it's validity.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Did B&N have this technology installed before the patent was issued to Amazon.com?
I'm not saying the lawsuit has merit or not, but 1-click is more complicated than just "storing name and credit card number". The back end shipping system at Amazon reviews orders and automatically combines separate orders into one shipping unit. I don't know if it took "thousands of hours", but there may have been some non-trivial problems to solve (beyond the naive "Hey Beevus, heh heh, heh heh, just do a SELECT on the address!!! huh heh! heh huh!).
I honestly can't see this patent holding up in court. Like the article says, Amazon is always in the middle of a lawsuit with some company over something. I think them picking a fight with barnes and noble is just stupid, because they will lose their patent. This is pretty much equivalent to "1-Click" Logins... "your user information gets stored in a database and the browser receives a cookie...". Could anyone see a patent like that every holding up in court? Obviously not. Therefore this patent is soon to be dead in the water, in my opinnion.
The good:
Two companies which nearly define "deep pockets" are going to fight it out here. Instead of the little guy being picked on by the big guy, two evenly sized competitors will be going at it- which means that maybe something other than money will determine the outcome of the case.
The bad:
It will still be IP lawyers determining the outcome. What do you think the odds are of B&N's guys saying "all software patents are crap!"? That tack might lead to a useful outcome, but no... they'll be arguing that "this particular patent is crap... of course, all of ours are brilliant and original, so don't touch those." They'd never jeopardize their incomes by pushing for a ruling that would have expansive and much needed impact.
My conclusion:
While this case might be interesting, it won't change anything, because of the vested interests of the lawyers who will end up controlling the case. Patents won't really fall in the courts until a little guy is attacked by a big guy, and defended by a lawyer who does pro bono work and is thus willing to attack the system from within. Until that time, corporate IP lawyers will continue fighting small battles while making very sure they don't win the war.
IAAL,BIANLY
really! how can this be? This is totaly rediclious. Does this mean that I can patent "storing stuff in a database" and start suing everyone?
Profit isn't everything.
This is getting more and more ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned, cookies do this anyway. All that is being added here is that the cookie has a counterpart on the server, which stores the data. This is going to be a canonical example of how *BAD* software patents really are. Lets hope that it falls in court.
I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
Isn't this the way that standard shopping cart scripts work? You enter all your your information into a database, you have a username and password, and that information can be optionally stored in a cookie. I didn't know that you could 'patent' such an idea.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
No, it's true. Something like this DOES take thousands of hours - as long as you factor in the coffee breaks, reading the manuals, designing the right gif buttons, etc...
:-)
... and especially so if you count in the lawyer's hours
Seriously, this sounds awfully like the claims of companies who have had software source downloaded by hackers and who have then had to put a value on the property that was "taken". The sooner that something like this gets exposed in court as the scam it is, the better.
A little planning goes a long way...
I really hope B&N don't just back off from using 1-click shopping or modify their site enough so that it no longer 'infringes'. We need a few companies with a bit of financial clout behind them to contest these obvious patents just to (hopefully!) show people that although the patent office might be handing out patents for 'breathing, using the lungs as a aperatus to sustain life', the courts might take a somewhat dim view.
It would be nice if the courts became so flooded with these ridiculous claims that they started penalising people who obtain then attempt to uphold patents which are far too obvious.
Amazon might think twice about taking legal action if there was a good chance of it losing a couple of million dollars.
rm -rf / is the evil of all root
This is another example of how dumb the patent office is. This patent can't stand. This sort of thing has been used for years. My company has had a system since '91 doing this sort of thing. Web sites have stored user preferences for years. Before that there were BBSes. Before that...
--
http://cheeser.blog-city.com
not only is this a chance to see if these stupid patents are enforcible, if the media picks up on this and makes it a big deal ala OJ Simpson, we might actually get something done about them as a whole. on second thought... its improbable... no teary eyed witnesses crying out "YOU KILLED HER!!!", no DNA evidence, not even a shrunk glove... nah, definately not something worthy of 24 hour coverage that joe normal at home would watch. Its merely the future of software thats at stake here. yup, its just one greedy company going after another...
--
# I have no brain
You will all be server with subpoenas!
hahaha... what a laugh.
-- kwashiorkor --
Leaps in Logic
should not be confused with
Jumping to Conclusions.
Barnes And Nobles is no saint in the frivolous lawsuit department, either. A couple years ago, they sued Amazon.com for not charging sales tax.
Hopefully as little will come of this patent case as came of that.
What I find most sad about this whole thing is that to me, as a potential customer, the "1-Click ordering" is one of the least interesting features of their site. It is like a brick-and-morter store acting as if their cash register were the most crucial part of their business.
The cake is a pie
----------
Government: If you are a big company and are the first one to pay for the cost of owning this IDEA, it's yours!
Corps: Really? Okay... we'll start buying up ALL the ideas that we can think of.
Citizens: But as individuals we cannot afford to buy all the ideas. The corporations are going to own them all!
Government (to people): That's okay... we will protect you.
Government (to corporations): The people are upset. We need to have good reason to let you own all the IDEAS.
Corporations (to government): Cool... here are a few "contributions" in exchange for giving us ownership of the IDEAS.
Government (to all): In order to keep the Economy running, we need to give ownership of the IDEAS to the Corporations. But don't worry, if the corporations violate too many rights, we will step in and take care of everything.
---------
*SHUDDER* I really hate parts of this system at times.
Blah... As I recall, Music Boulevard (may it rest in peace) had this feature several years ago.
I have no problem with software patents for things that are truly novel and that advance the field they are in... this is not one of those things.
That Commander Taco thinks that my Slashdot login should be much more secure than the Amazon 1-click stuff.
Doesn't it just warm the cockles of your heart?
-- Under/Overrated is meta-moderation, and therefore is Redundant.
You know, this may not be a patent thing at all. It may be a move to get political action. If millions of comapnies, products, or packages can be affected by this lawsuit, someone will try to enact a law licensing and bonding web designers. "After all, they are in charge of our security." The locksmithing industry was plagued by such a thing years ago. A set of fingerprints along with a 100 dollar fee gave one a "permit" to practice the trade in California. What did it do? Put the fingerprints on file with the police, (just incase a guy in the trade was dumb enough to use his own equiptment to commit a crime-which he could already make $60 an hour), and gave $100 a year to a political board to legislate more rules. Watch this thing, politicians abound......
My dogma ran over your Karma....My Karma's a Greyhound: ugly, but strong. -You may think you know what, but I know who
I was on GEine years ago, and I could order stuff with one keyboard click (once I had found something worth ordering, which was rare). Let loose the lawyers of war!
All this rediculous patenting has drawn me to one conclusion. I am going to patent the char[] data type.
From this point on, I now own the char[] data type. It cannot be used in any code, commercial or otherwise, without my express written consent. Any existing code written using char[] is also subject to patent infringement. Anyone found using char[] in their software will be sued for $60,000 per compiled executable. To save on the agony of lwayers, court dates, etc I ask that anyone using char[] just confess now and mail me your $60,000 checks.
Thank You.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
In general I stand in favor of patents, though some are completely abused. I don't think that a company should be allowed to patent something, not enforce violations for years, and then start making a big stink after the technology is well entrenched (LZW, MP3, etc... RSA, so far as I know, has been protected by RSA, which made companies create the DH alternative).
But this, I think, is absurd. They're basically saying they've patented the idea of knowing their customers and of adding conviences to the shopping experience. So far as I remember, the feature was in place more than a year ago. I didn't look, but i also don't remember seeing anything like "patent-pending technology" or anything.
Besides that, if it's been out for over a year, I thought they had to do something to start the filing process to protect themselves. They didn't, they just released the technology and later patented it. I think every website in the world should step forward and say "hey, we track our customers, too. We store information about them that they choose to give us."
Who cares if that info is a credit card number or a username/login? The underlying technique of storing relevant info in a cookie on the client machine and looking up the appropriate data on in a database somewhere is not new, and though it was probably a breakthrough at the time, it was a logical extension of where the internet was going.
B&N better not even think of settling. I'll switch completely to them if they duke it out with Amazon.
You know, Slashdot is very similar to one click shopping. I enter my username, password, moderation preferences, sidebar preferences, etc. Then when I go to Slashdot, I get information (which Amazon implicitly admits is a product, since it tried to patent it). I'm not charged for the information. But is that a big enough difference to actually warrant a patent. I could one-click-shop for info on Slashdot before Amazon was doing it.
A helpful lawyer gave some info on software patents. Does anyone know how one would go about trying to void a patent?
Maybe Slashdotters can help B&N find prior art, not for the sake of the health of their business, but because this case seems to be about to get a lot of media coverage, so maybe it will attract more attention to this problem
Does anyone have a concrete, documented example of prior art? That's what B&N need (IANAL, but that much is obvious). This is probably the biggest thing that /. readers can do to help this case... now, what's the e-mail address of the B&N legal team?
etc
I recommend that SlashDot change all of its book links from Amazon.com to BN.com in protest of this ridiculous patent suit. SlashDot participates in Amazon's affiliate program. By pointing at Amazon, SlashDot is a party to this outrage.
But the trouble is, a good idea has a way to spread, and it ends up being futile to try to cling on to it. Not only that, it deprives consumers of quality service. In the end, companies doing this try to cling to an artificially maintained consummer base, but it ends up eroding up and the idea spreads around.
I think Amazon realises that. There's plenty of other companies doing this also, and certainly not just online bookstores. I know Chapters.ca does it (they store your credit card info, so you only have to enter it once; buying a book takes one click, and you're processing to checkout.)
I think what Amazon is doing is trying to hurt the competition by dragging them into a lawsuit. I don't think they care if they win or not. They're projecting the image that they invented a novel system, and that BnN is copying them for their success.
So, let's not expect a dramatic turn of events; either they settle this out of court, as a way to calm the flames, or Amazon wins. But no one, not the CEO's, not the lawyers, not the judges, will once realise the concept of software patent is crap. They'll just use it as law fodder, and be happy with it.
"There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than to contaminate it with the facts."
Patent laws in the US are quite clearly getting out of control. It would appear to me that this centres on the ability of one company to beat other companies to filing a patent on the implimentation of an open standard.
/. ! Oh no!
What does '1-Click! actually do? A user enters information about their shipping and billing addresses and credit card number into a form on a website which results in the data being stored in a database. A cookie is then set in the browser which eases the heavy burden of re-entering the data again. Oh my God! This is clearly a ground breaking, technologically superior implimentation of cookies and databases. I have never seen anything like this ever!
Seriously though, the judge does need to tke some technical briefings before makeing a ruleing in this case as it could mean the end of anyone else using cookies if the judgment isn't carefully worded. Argh! I'll have to enter my nickname and password every time I visit
Any comments thoughts on this?
I would like to cancel Amazon.com's retention of my credit info. I made the mistake of ordering some Solaris books from them that I subsequently returned.
A few months later I got some spam from Amazon and remembered that they probably still retained "account information" on me including Credit Card info. I responded to their spam by requesting that they delete my account and remove my Credit information from their servers.
I got back a response of them wanting to play "20 Questions" with me- what books had I previously ordered, etc. etc.
Maybe I'm an intolerant curmudgeon on some of this, but I shouldn't have to go through bells and whistles to have my personal credit information deleted permanently from some commercial site's server. Perhaps I didn't get a lawyer involved early enough or something. Obviously there is a certain amount of liability that they assume when they hang onto confidential information that I gave them no permission to retain. Furthermore, there must be a certain amount of liability they assume when they make it difficult for me to ask it to be removed from their server.
Call and try to have your info cancelled from Amazon.com. Have fun, and good luck.
Yes, they did. As a matter of fact, they might have had this technology before amazon.
And let everyone know why.
I've had an idea for a technology that I think will revolutionize computing. I call the notion, "Stored Program Computing". Basicly, instead of having seperate data areas for data & program instructions, you have one large array of memory and store both data AND computer programs there. With clever encoding, it will be easy for the CPU to tell the difference between data & instructions. I predict this will lead to an incredible increase in computer useasbility. It will facilitate another idea I've had, which I call "Time Sharing" (we'll swap programs/data in and out of memory allowing many users or processes to share the same computer).
Apparently, back in the '50s, some obscure electrician named Von Newbie (or something like that) had a similar idea, which is why I'm flying off to Norway, where it doesn't matter who comes up with the idea first, only who files the patent first.
Naturally, I'm going to have vigorously defend my patent, demanding royalties from manufacturers who have created products using my tech, software vendors who write software taking advantage of my design, and users (Remember: it takes two to violate my patent, one thieving corporation to build the device, and another to use it)
Thank you, and I'll be expecting my royalty checks soon!
Dana
Rob, patent "One Click Posting". Then patent "One click Meta-Moderating". You'd make a fortune.
Here's another one (a freebie).
Patent Pending:
First post.
A method of annoying both posters and readers by posting to Slashdot with first post in the subject line. Post must have very little content and not mention Mae Ling Mak Naked and Petrified (no gifs because of patent problems).
Negative cash flow is worse than nothing.
FIRST PATENT!
Just look at BN's web site, almost identical to Amazon's, same style , same feature, give me some variety, people!!
-------------------------------------------------
I view Amazon's behavior as being rather similar to a neighborhood polluter: their emissions may be under the legal limit, but they are still a nuisance; would you buy from them and support them? (Actually, from an economic point of view, bad patents and the lawsuits they engender are quite similar to pollution as well.)
Doubt it will accomplish much, but I sent the following polite letter to feedback@amazon.com - maybe you would like to send a POLITE letter too??
Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writing to complain about Amazon's use of overreaching software patents.
Patent No. 5960411 for 1-Click, is an example of a patent that has been awarded completely out of place. The concept that lies behind 1-Click is in no way new to Amazon, or unique. Using such a patent simply to harass your business competitors is in my opinion an extremely low way of doing business. Such patents serve simply to supress programmers from finding more effective solutions to problems.
Do you really expect that anyone who wishes to develop such a system must come to you for permission before commencing programming? Especially when there are so many existing versions of this system on the net?
It is a shame that a company who symbolise for many the success of the Web as a business medium feel compelled to resort to such low tactics to stay ahead in the race for market share.
I hope that the use of this patent by Amazon will result in so much negative publicity, that you will not be tempted to use such crass measures in the future. How much more positive it would have been if Amazon could instead have joined in lobbying the US Patent Office against the granting of such broad patents.
Yours sincerely
Steve Cook
A little planning goes a long way...
Is it my imagination or are companies rushing to patent concepts which are more marketing features than any real "innovations". If that is the case, then the market is the place to decide, not the legal systme. While it may be disappointing to the class of patent lawyers, is it too radical a concept for companies to be competing on their execution rather than trying to spoil the ground around them? People might be interested in an article which points out the benefits of cooperation rather than the paranoid dog-eat-dog world. Perhaps too much competition indicates that the field is not big enough (ie profitable) to support that many companies and its a signal that resources are better deployed elsewhere (one reason why capitalism is more economically efficient).
One problem with governments is that they can effectively define monopolies. Could the patent system be replaced by a more market driven system based on property rights? One can point to the media industry where you have song-writer creative rights which require recognition and further payment from films and other down-stream activities. Perhaps OpenSource software could provide certification rights or distribution rights? It would certainly benefit companies who are thinking about the opensource route but are relunctant to see the fruits of their efforts being appropriated without fair compensation. At the very least, it would reduce overheads due to non-core activities (e.g. legal liability) and perhaps let smaller firms florish.
LL
to: bezos@amazon.com
Dear Amazon.com operations officer,
In response to a rumor regarding a patent and law suit relating to 1 click shopping, please delete all information regarding me, Anymymous Coward, my visa information, etc from your databases. I will no longer be shopping at amazon.
Good timing too; 100% of my e-shopping this upcoming holiday will NOT occur at amazon. A quick review of my records indicates that I've
spent approximately $x (or more) in the past year at your store. It was good while it lasted, but you obviously think you're the first company
to associate valuable resource commitments with a single click.
Bye bye amazon! I hope that gaping hole in your collective feet isn't too uncomfortable.
Good luck,
Anonymouse Coward
Ya think that they give me a free rental cars for life, if I they make money from suing Amazon???
Injured worker wins against Mattel!
Some thoughtful AC, who really should be moderated up, suggested a class action lawsuit vs. the USPTO.
>I say we get a class action lawsuit put together
>against the US patent office for negligence in >what patents they allow to be registered.
IANAL and don't know how feasible this is, or realistic, but given patenets such as this, who knows? Someone moderate that up....
itachi
Im gonna ask this just once.
If Amazon.com wins this patent lawsuit. Thats IT. I buy 3 or 4 books a WEEK from these people. I will start going to BarnesAndNoble.com on principle alone. Even if I dont save. 2 or 3 bucks here and there.
Or Fatbrain.com
They are even VERY competitively priced
Amazon wont be seeing any more of my business. No matter how freakin cool One Click shopping is
I agree they DO have a right to innovate. But this his not innovation.
It upsets me greatly I will have to stop ordering books at amazon.com (NOT)
Amazon! Stop this nonsense. Im begging ya here otherwise you lose my business... this is nasty stuff.
Jeremy Allen nospamjallennospam@nospamidminc.comTo: feedback@amazon.com
Subject: Stop lying about "1-Click"
Dear Madam or Sir,
I am a prior customer of Amazon, and also software developer for business Web sites. Today I had a visceral reaction when I read that Amazon is filing lawsuits because of a patent on "1-Click". You may be able to fool a lot of people, but you can't fool those of us who work in this industry. The idea that Amazon has a prior claim to technology that stores and re-uses cutomer information is one of the most brazenly dishonest things I've ever heard. You're lying, and you know it.
Cease and desist from this nonsense, or I will most certainly never buy any products from you again.
Regards,
....
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
Wonder if the patent office will be sued over the patent.The shopping cart is at the top of the page.
Priceline gave a ton of technical information to Microsoft about their business. The founder of Priceline met with Expedia's chairman and Bill Gates to discuss a cooperative relationship. Then Microsoft backed out when Priceline wouldn't sell them any shares below the IPO price. Interesting note from Bloomberg is that Gates is reported (by Priceline lawyers... take it as you will) as saying that he wasn't going to let patent infringement get in their way, because so many other companies were suing Microsoft for the same thing, Priceline would have to "get in line".
In this case, though, I seriously doubt that bn.com and Amazon got together to discuss anything mutually beneficial, since they've been suing each other since day one about silly things like which one is "Earth's biggest bookstore" and the like. And I think if they came up with it independently, and implement it even remotely dissimilar on either end, they're going to win the suit.
I think it's pretty clear that they're targeting bn.com because they're a rival. There are a slew of other internet sites that use this 1-Click / Express Lane idea. It's not as cutting edge as they'd like to think.
You're right.
The cake is a pie
Hmm,
:-)
I think I'm gonna patent saving user data on a server.
Hey, Rob, you owe me license fees
Now we can have great things like eToaster, which is obviously *much* better than standard Toasters. Why is this? Because you can use a web browser to do an electronic transaction with your eToaster from your webbed(patent pending) to order some Toast.com.
Not only all this, but I think we could patent concepts too. How about eLogic? Heck why settle for that when we could patent the entire language with webEnglish!
Another thing that I find tiresome is companies that insist on being 'savy' by putting .com at the end of their name so they appear to be one company, but they are in reality something else. Why don't we create companies like cocacola.com or intel.com it makes sense to me!
So why not do Amazon.com one better. We can create a e-one-click-shopping and we'll create Amazon.com.com, that'll show 'em!
I guess this finishes my e-rant. Till next time!
This space for sale
It seems everyone thinks the patent thing is getting out of hand. Why don't we the consumers send companies like amazon.com a message and get our products from somewhere else. Its not like Amazon.com is the only place to buy books.
I hand my VISA card and signature to underpaid kids in the mall so that security's already shot. I really hope no one gets hold of my /. profile though. That would be disastrous.
"How's this for a compelling sig?"
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
Perhaps Amazon is counting the hours of each monkey it had sitting at a terminal writing code, and the hours of one guy checking to see if any of them accidentally made it work.
I think I'll patent two-click shopping. You know, since things will get more complicated over time.
OK....everyone does the One-Click thing. Why not just make a button that you have to click twice? This would be a slap in the face to Amazon....set up something like:
Click Here to Order button
You click, and another window comes up saying, "Are you sure you want to purchse (product)?" With an "Yes" button and a "No" button. Click on "Yes" and it makes the purchase.
This whole lawsuit just made my mind up that I won't ever use Amazon.com again. Maybe we should all start showing we care by voting with our pocketbooks- next time you are going to buy a book try fatbrain.com or some other competetor.
Now I know Amazon.com isn't the only company to engage in this type of practice (laughable lawsuits which go against any principle of a free and open web), but they seem to do an outstanding job of it.
It is this type of thing that exemplifies the trend of turning a great technology into a cash cow for a few mis-guided CEO's who didn't use the web until the mid 90's.
Install rh6 (w/ apache). ~35m
Add ssl support,recompile. ~20m
Install mod_php3 ~1m
Install pgsql ~15m + setup
Setup permissions, verify setup - ~20m
Use cookie support in php3 to store any user data, or optionally use http authentication. ~0m use, ~3hr/devel (if you don't know about FM)
Webpage setup - could take up to a week, ~40h
There you have it.. a total of up to 50 hrs. Now Amazon thinks it spent thousands of hours on that? How many meetings did they force their developers to sit in on instead of doing real work? :) And about that "single-click" shopping - see also the whole point of http cookies - to store persistent information on a remote machine! This meets two of the criterion mentioned in a recent /. article - obviousness and prior work. I bet I could prove both. :^)
--
What's better?
1. A company reporting zero net income, with no products or services in its pipeline, dead-end current products and services, no potential new customers, and no industry hype?
2. A company reporting losses in the millions, with a huge customer base, a huge number of potential new customers, millions of dollars in R&D and marketing, tons of industry hype (both good and bad), brand name recognition, and a continuous stream of new products?
If you chose number one, then thank you for playing, Mr. Buffett.
I think, at least in the case of Amazon, the whole patent thing was simply a mechanism to, hopefully, stick it to B&N. Amazon took the risk with the online bookstore, and B&N simply went ahead to copy it and claim THEY innovated.
Of course, the downside is that if the patent DOES stick, it's a dangerous precedent.
Harry
As reported in the highly regarded The Onion, Microsoft has beaten everyone to the punch by patenting one and zero. Because of the bits used in this post I own Microsoft at least twenty-bucks
The lawyers are the ones who drive this nonsense. Big big big bucks to be made by legal teams by suing a large company.
I think a judge should be able to fine lawyers who take cases like these. Let them spend hours upon hours getting the case toghther then march them into court and tell them:
"I find this to be a complete and utter waste of my time, I'm fining you $100,000."
I know it's silly but it would make laywers think twice before accepting a frivolous case if they thought they would get nailed for it.
Don`t just mail Amazon to say how crap this is. Mail Barnes & Noble as well, and tell them you support their fighting this lawsuit.
Did you also notice that Bezos has patented a way of transmitting credit card info over a non-secure connection? Just use your touch-tone telephone to enter the number or just send some of the digits and ask the customer if it's the right card. Meaning that they have the rest of the card number on file. I tried that with my isp, when my account expired and I wasn't sure which credit card they were using (it took them 3 months to notice) and they couldn't handle it, so now they are using the mail to bill me. Maybe they were aware of the patent and didn't want to pay Bezos royalties.
will amazon sue other companies or the only reason they did that was to attack bn?
i suspect the latter. i hope there is still smth decent left in amazon that will stop them from trying to get money by suing someone that is not their direct competitor....
we'll see..
...sie sind nicht grün
We've been doing exactly that with our e-commerce sites for ages. Each customer fills in their info once and then never has to do it again. Setting this kind of thing up is TRIVIAL, and if it took them "thousands of hours" then they are incompetent. I work for a BIG e-commerce solutions house...
Maybe you've forgotten, but there was a time back before B&N and Amazon went wild and dominated books. Remember those little local bookstores? All of them in my area are gone. I say instead of support B&N (Which has more than its share of stupid lawsuits btw), go out and buy books from your local dealer.
Just a question...From all the propaganda about Mr. Bezos, I though the whole point of 1-click was to avoid the Shopping cart (add an item, view my list of items, checkout), and simply click to buy. There's an article somewhere about how he bitched out his engineers for having 2 clicks to buy (1 to select, 1 to confirm)...If you pick it, you buy it (and anything else you pick within a certain session), unless you cancel it within a set amount of time. Is this what B&N (and sites before) have done? I don't agree with what they are doing, just wonder if this is a pride/ego thing.
Hate to 'me too!', but I think a few people agreeing with this here isn't a bad thing.
As a developer who has build shopping systems on the internet, I think Amazon is using the U.S. government as a tool to eliminate competition. Can I go out and start a store and say I invented how you check-out at a super market, or pay for tickets at a movie, or wait in line at your local town fair? I think we seriously need to take notice to this issue because it affect the the whole idea of a "free market" on the internet. Amazon clearly did this knowing it could sue the crapload out of anyone who decided to open up shop on the internet. Skott
I think theres is a way to re-create your account, and while I'm not sure this actually kills all your data, it appears to. I also think there is some option to have them not save the #'s
Amusingly enough, from the amazon.co.uk website:
The amusing thing is, of course, that under english law, companies are obliged to offer warranties of fitness of purpose.
In response to the original article on the 1-click patent, someone posted that they figured Amazon was just covering their ass, that they wouldn't actually try to enforce such a silly patent. I tried to give Amazon a little credit, and was inclined to agree with the post. I won't make that mistake again.
1. Have the patent reexamined, in light of printed publiciations (might possibly include web sites) that disclosed the invention one year before the application was filed. This is relatively cheap: $2000 or so. But, it is limited to printed publications one year before the application.
2. File for a ruling in a Court that the patent was obvious, old, already disclosed, some other basis. This is very expensive: tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of litigation.
I was going to make a project of having bad patents reexamined in light of printed publications more than one year old, but I don't know how to raise the $2000 a pop. By the way, Slashdot probably does NOT infringe the patent, because all of the claims are limited to "ordering" and "purchasing." The specification does not seem to use these terms in a way that would include the Slashdot model.
..let them know why you are doing it. Customers walk away from stores all the time, unless a company knows they are doing something that annoys people they will not change that behaviour. If they find a number of people leaving for the same reason, change is inevitable.
+&x
Since your transaction with the car rental agency did not all occur on-line, the patent is not infringed. Besides, they can't make money from Amazon for suing against an issued patent. What would the claim be?
Either 1) B&N decides that it would be cheaper and eaiser to negotiate a licence then fight a legal battle or 2) they fight it out anyway - and probably win I expect. The latter case would pretty much nullify the patent claim so at that point anyone else will not have to worry about being sued over it.
>>If you chose number one, then thank you for playing, Mr. Buffett. Uh....wrong You'll note that Buffet's methodology is not to bet on tech companies with negative earnings (used to be called losing money). If Amazon loses millions per quarter, has a business plan that NEVER shows them making a profit, how long is this business model sustainable for? Don't forget that their market can vanish overnight if customers just decide to click elsewhere.....there's nothing locking people into Amazon for purchases.
Any body know whether or not its true? I never ordered anything from them, but I thought AOL would allow a user to login (i.e. enter a user name and password) and then order things from their popup adds or premium games/servies and AOL would bill it directly to the user's credit card, without having to enter a credit card number (i.e. retrieve billing info from the server). Does this qualify as prior art? Any AOL users out there (doubt it)? if there are, please verify that AOL let you do this! I think Amazon's patent claim is ridiculous, and as much as I don't like AOL, at least AOL beat them to it without patenting it because its so blatently obvious!
You must define on-line. The agents who take the information on the phone are on-line. The agents who scan the car are on-line.
If AVIS/Budge/ect. had patented this, they can sue for patent infringement by Amazon. At the very least, this might be considered prior art that could invalidate the Amazon patent.
Injured worker wins against Mattel!
Now, the goal of the patent system is to expose innovation to the public, so that others may take advantage of it. In a competitive environment, innovators may be afraid to disclose their innovations, for fear that others may copy their hard work at will. Society has much to lose if inventions remain as trade-secrets. So the patent system gives people an incentive to disclose and to share.
But why on earth does the system allow these patent holders to have exclusive right to licensing? It allows them to say "no" to anyone and say "yes" to different parties on different terms. If I invent something truly remarkable, patent it, and don't license it at all to anyone, but instead just sue people who try to replicate my invention, how does society benefit?
It seems to me that instead, the patent system should allow everybody to license the invention, and not leave the decision in the hands of the patent holder. I know there will be issues about license fees and terms, but surely something can be worked out?
sreeram.
CDNOW has had my credit card information since the days when their primary interface was telnet. I've never done business with amazon, I'm certainly not going to start now.
XML causes global warming.
Doesn't the federal government have some sort of exemption form class action lawsuits ? I would be surprised if they don't.
Nice idea though. There has to be some campaign for changing the appalling state of patent law. It's not just the US either, but it's probably worst there, and the US pressures other countries into going along with their take on IP issues. The problem is that these stupid laws hurt everybody. Furthermore, it's not at all obvious how badly they hurt people. Silly patents like this make everybodies lives worse in a million minor ways. Oh, so now I have to enter credit information every time I buy something from a particular company. It's not the kind of thing people get passionate about. Nobody can estimate the true cost of inappropriate patents.
However, when laws hurt a small number of powerful companies they form an effective lobby to bribe congressmen with campaign contributions in no time. Any attempt to change patent laws will recieve an effective counter attack from the few large companies that actually benefit from them.
"Democracy is coming to the USA" - Leonard Cohen
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Abstract: the anterior part of the central nervous system enclosed in the cranium of vertebrates, consisting of a mass of nerve tissue organized for the perception of sensory impulses, the regulation of motor impulses, and the production of memory, learning, and consciousness
Inventor: Nicodemas
Assignee: Slashdot
Application number: 929001
Filed: October 22, 1999
"Inspire me! Tell me it cannot be done!"
so, i was going to buy a book from Amazon a couple weeks back. then i read on slashdot that Amazon had acquired a patent on one-click. so, when i went to the online bookstore to effect my purchase my fingers typed www.fatbrain.com/
i suppose that if every slashdotter who was annoyed at the Amazon patent strategy did the same, Amazon might be less inclined assert the patent.
no, i don't own stock or work for or have a brother in law at fatbrain or barnes & noble or anything. i'm just negatively inclined toward amazon right now.
It's the ONLY THING!!!
Offtopic, yes. Flame, yes. Moderator do your thing!
Tim Behrendsen is still an ass.
Isn't Microsoft 3-click?
.exe and non .exe. Yeah, we'll delete that .dll with no problem, but we'll make sure you don't delete the .exe accidentally. Of course, then you go the the recycle bin, empty, confirmation.....I'm not going to do all that math. :)
Highlight files.
Click (#1)
Are you sure you want to delete?
Click Yes (#2)
File "blah.exe" is a program, if you delete....are you sure?
Click Yes (#3)
Of course, this is if you select multiple files that contain
There seems to much FUD floating around about patents, so I thought I'd toss in a few extra facts. I've filed for ten patents for my previous employer, and keep a close eye on the patent world.
1. $25K/patent. Patents are not cheap. It costs about $10K-$15K to disclose, draft, file, and sheppard a patent to conclusion. Add to this another $10K of time for people in your group to disclose and review the patent. Now, some would view getting ten patents at $25K each better than one engineer at $250K (loaded). Some patent firms are much better than others; mail me for some recommendations.
2. Don't patent it yourself.You can learn a lot from the Patent It Yourself book, but you probably won't make a good patent. You can save money by preparing for the disclosure and by drawing your own diagrams. Never opt for the various 'individual inventor' reduced fees; the clauses bite and kill your patent. Also, there are a bunch of rip-off places that will sign any NDA and talk about 'marketting'.
3. No patents = No Silicon Valley. Silicon valley exists because of patents. Otherwise, MS or Sun would keep a group of engineers on standby just to clone every interesting piece of software. Patents provide reasonable barriers to entry for small firms. Not everything is a matter of time to market.
4. Silly Patents. There are many silly patents out there, and more being filed all the time. The problem is the breakdown at the US Patent Office, mostly by the previous administrator. For a while, patent agents were being reviewed by how many patents they awarded, and so they awarded a lot of trash.
5. Defense. In software, patents are defensive for the most part. Cisco, for example, has publically promised never to sue. Patents keep others from quickly ripping you off, and from others trying to enforce patents against you. Xerox is the notable exception; the idiots keep thinking they can raise money from their portfolio. Remember, nothing a law firm does can keep you from being sued; it can only keep you from losing.
6. Solutions. Thanks to my favorite patent attorney for suggesting this one. The most onerous problem for the patent office and patent attorneys is finding the prior art. The community can go a long way towards solving this problem by coming up with a good, searchable database of prior art. While the patents themselves are searchable at IBM's patent site, prior art is still mostly a matter of luck and money. Only small steps have been taken so far, though there is a rumor that the old Apple research notebooks from the 70's are posted somewhere.
There's a lot more about patents. It's a religious issue, even among patent attorneys. Most feel that the patent office does an inconsistent job, and all patent attorneys I know of cheered when gene sequence patents were tossed.
Profit motivates invention.
It was a figure of speech, similar to "Remember what they didn't teach you at Harvard Business School." Apparently the effect was lost.
Have you seen Amazon's business plan? I would be very interested to know where you got it.
And yes, there is nothing locking people into Amazon for purchases, but they have a ridiculous lead in every conceivable category (page hits, brand name recoginition, sales, etc.) Whether you like them or not, Amazon is really the front runner in internet sales.
... was September 12, 1997.
So. Who was using cookies before that date?
#1 is a dead company (and they should already know it.) #2 is a dying company or a startup.
While your point is taken, the simple fact remains: A business cannot sustain itself by spending more money than it generates. In Amazon's case, they have "equity"... i.e. non-cash things that have value (patents, programmers, software, investments, etc.)
The modern world of economics is far (very far) from simple. Companies spend money that doesn't exist, publish corp. valuations that exceed the amount of cash ever printed by the treasury... It's all accounting smoke and mirrors.
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
>>Have you seen Amazon's business plan? I would be very interested to know where you got it.
Most analysts have...in fact, we have Amazon actually PRESENT that they have nothing.
>>Amazon is really the front runner in internet sales.
Again, unless a business can actually leverage any of that stuff (hits, etc) into profits, it means nothing. The only way for AMZN to do this is to raise prices, which may instantly reduce the effect of the other stuff (hits, etc).
I think you don't understand what you're talking about. First off, if you work for a "BIG" e-commerce solutions house and this problem is "TRIVIAL". Then why in the world does your company have so much bloat???? Secondly, hours really do add up: Starting from concept, development, implementation, functional testing, usability studies, security analysis, marketting. If 25 employees and managers spend a week on the project - there's your 1000 hours. Oh, and by the way, to do it right, the security analysis was probably contracted out. So finding a contractor and hiring them was probably a bit of work there. Oh, also, this is more than just simply storing your credit card numbers for retrival. Tom
This isn't a patent on an obscure technological or mathmatic thing that won't make sense to a layman, like the LZW or MP3 patents. This is an extremely obvious thing that any dimwit (in other words, judges and jurors) will be able to understand.
If B&N decides to fight in court instead of settling, it seems like this case would have a better chance of getting a "this patent is a joke" ruling, than many other cases.
And that would be good. It would be nice to have a high-profile software-patent-overturned ruling on the record.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
amazon.com - please reference account "brian@pobox.com" - I've personally ordered hundreds of books from you to the tune of about ten thousand dollars.
Reference this account because you just lost it. And I doubt it's the only one. (If I have my say, sizeable work accounts will migrate as well.)
I wrote Amazon about this previously. I suggested that one of their larger customer bases, such as any who had purchased a Linux or BSD book in the past, would not take kindly to their abusing this patent.
Barnes and Noble seems a likely next choice of bookstore. I'd like to know if others have good experience with other online booksellers.
I have been buying from Amazon since most people didn't know of their existence, and I have always been very pleased with their service. However, because they are resorting to tactics such as this, they have just lost a customer. And I'm going to make sure that they know that. It's important for the online community to let them know that we won't tolerate that sort of underhanded business practice. It's bad for all of us.
The worst bn.com does, the better for Amazon. With less competition, they can raise their prices. They are screwing bn.com over, and more importantly, trying to do the same to the rest of us. I urge everyone to write to Amazon denouncing this tactic and to boycott them until they stop such idiocy.
actually, i dont think they have to change the focus of the case in order for it to be used in the future as a precedent against other cases of similar nature. they would have to win, of course.
;).
INAL either (although i was raised by one...but that doesnt count for much
--Siva
Keyboard not found.
Keyboard not found.
Press F1 to continue.
I don't know about you, but if Amazon is going to be keeping my credit card number on their disks for more than a few minutes, I want them to spend "thousands of hours" on the software which manages it.
Remember when Amazon.com, then a puny enterprise, was sued by B&N for being the "World's Biggest Bookstore"?
At that point, I vowed to never, ever buy anything from Barnes & Noble's web site. (I even boycotted B&N stores for about a month, but that one didn't stick -- the stores are just too useful).
I'm appalled by this type of lawsuit. Makes me think I should go buy my next book order from B&N, for they are now both acting like bullies.
(Of course I won't, because they use Windows(tm) servers, but maybe I'll find an entirely different company that's worthy of my patronage).
Any suggestions? Sadly, fatbrain.com uses Microsoft stuff, and my hatred for companies using Microsoft junkware exceeds even that of people putting forth silly lawsuits. But it's a close-run thing.
D
----
I just sent Amazon an email saying until they drop this ridiculous patent I will purchase my books from their competitors...though I may continue to browse Amazon to see the customer comments. And I didn't do it as an AC, either.
Do you want to restart now?
Yes -- No
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
(read with appropriate level of cynicism)
Make sure those hounds are carrying nice, big campaign contribution checks. Trial lawyers do.
No wonder Amazon had yet to turn a profit...
:)
It takes them "thousands of hours and millions of dollars" to implement something as simple and obvious as "one-click shopping"!
This is so sad, but it was probably inevitable. Amazon is a big company now, which means it's controlled by the lawyers. Remember, kids: big companies don't innovate!
I'm good friends with the guy who implemented one-click shopping (he refers to it as ``the money vaccuum.'') But I won't let that stop me -- I'm still not shopping there any more.
Here's the letter I sent them. I encourage all of you to send letters of your own. (But don't just cut-and-paste someone else's letter, they can tell...)
---------------------------------
Subject: patent suit ==> losing customers
You have finally gone too far.
When you started spamming me, I was irritated, but didn't much care, since at least you gave me a way to unsubscribe. When you started selling your customers' private information down the river, I was irritated, but didn't much care, because I'm not overly concerned about my privacy. But now you've finally lost me as a customer.
Why? Because you asked for, and were awarded, a 17-year monopoly on the concept of "one-click shopping", because that idea is apparently such an innovation, such a breakthrough, that you never would have gone into business without the incentive of federally-mandated exclusive rights.
As if that wasn't bad enough, now you are sueing Barnes and Noble for adding a similar feature to their web site. So much for the bullshit apology one often hears of "we only have patents for defensive purposes, in case someone bigger and stronger sues us for patent infringement first."
Amazon.com is a great web site, far better than any other online store I've used. But I will not be using it again. I will either use other web sites, or make more trips to physical stores from now on.
Convenience is nice, but I don't feel good giving my money to anticompetitive parasites who succeed because of their lawyers rather than the quality of their products and services.
The real shame of it is that your services are *good*. You don't need to compete this way. It's sad, and sickening.
Software patents are far more of a threat to competition and innovation than anything Microsoft has ever done.
Goodbye.
IIRC, patents are there to encourage inventors to share what they would otherwise keep to themselves. As it's impossible to keep a user interface secret without rendering it completely useless, what's to be gained by allowing one to be patented?
Holy grey area, Batman. I'm going to patent 'Service with smile' as the unique process that makes my business succesful. Then every time I see a happy employee somewhere I can sue their employer. What Amazon is doing is simple customer service. My Doctor's office does the same thing. To me, keeping info to make your customers experience better is customer service and something that has been done forever. I think that unless Amazon can prove that B&N stole actual code they are going to lose. I could probably write a perl program to do this myself, and I'm not a programmer. I'm sure many /. types could do this in their sleep. Oh well. I don't have any credit cards and the girls who work at my local book store are too cute to not want to shop in person.
I think it's outrageous that amazon is using its army of lawyers plus a very dubious patent to force another vendor to limit the services that vendor offers me. I just cancelled the two orders I had pending at amazon, asked them to cancel my account, opened an account at bn.com and placed my orders there.
Everything possible to be believ'd is an Image of Truth - Wm. Blake
Well its quite strange to me that it's possible to patent such things (There's alot more than just 1-click). However imho its not really amazons fault. If they get the patent they can make some money with it if not - well, maybe worth a try. But it IS a mistake to give away such patents. People giving away a patent like this or a patent on software products in general should think twice about the effect it could have and if it is worth a patent at all. Imho in this case it's rather strange that amazon got it and im quite eager to see who's going to win this fight.
Question: isn't this exactly the interface on some dealers' screens for securities and foreign exchange trading ?
One of the options the dealer has is to get a list of all the share parcels being bid or offered at the current instant, any of which he/she can accept with a single click. The patent's main claims are written so broadly (with essentially no reference to the internet, except later as a possible implementation), it seems to me that should blow them away.
Can anyone confirm the existence of such a system, or (better) offer B&N a printed user manual ?
Dear Ladies and Sirs,
I have been a regular customer of your German dependency and an occasional customer of your main business. Up to now I have been very satisfied with your services and recommended them to friends and acquaintances.
However, I have been made aware of the fact that you have obtained a patent on your so-called "1-Click-technology" and have used this patent not only defensively, but actively sued Barnes and Noble over this issue.
I am a trained computer scientist and consider the "1-Click-technology" to be neither innovative nor "non-obvious for a practioner of the art". The patent should never have been issued in the first place. I consider the act of using it to hamper your competition with a lawsuit to be highly offensive.
For these reasons I will stop recommending Amazon, and I will carefully consider other options before using your services again.
Yours faithfully,
etc...
Stephan
When Yahoo changed the terms of service on
Geocities accounts, the organized boycott
made them change their minds within a week.
This seems like a good cause for a nice
organized boycott of Amazon.
www.boycottamazon.org probably doesn't sound
very pleasant to anybody there.
The client system is a VT-series dumb terminal. The single action is the act of logging in (not one click, but still...work with me here). The additional information previously stored is the /etc/passwd file and various other sysadminly trivia.
The product? CPU cycles. Remember when you had to pay by the clock for mainframe use?
--The basis of all love is respect
I wrote a program for our local high school a while back that only requires the user to enter their name and password and then they only have to "click once" to do whatever needs to be done.
Any lawyers out there wanna help me sue amazon? I didn't patent this "technology" but I'm sure there's a copyright infringement somewhere in there.
I was dismayed to learn from http://cnnfn.com/1999/10/22/bizbuzz/amazon/4 0 that
and http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/10/22/09592
you are suing barnsandnoble.com for the violation of your frivolous
1-click patent. I have used your service on several occasions in the past
and found it relatively convenient, but not particularily cost effective.
Now you are attacking a competitor which does a better job, in my
experience, of sourcing hard to find books.
On what charge? A violation of a patent which takes the idea of
calling up a store where I am known, asking them to send me an order and
bill my account, and translates that idea into an internet context. The
engineering side of the picture is no doubt of high quality, but was never
worthy of a patent. Granted it was the USPTO which granted this valueless
patent, and I understand it's value for defensive purposes, but to take
this patent and use it for attack purposes subverts the intention of
patents in a system of free enterprise.
I find myself with no choice than to stop using your service unless and
until you withdraw this lawsuit. I may not come back even if you do stop
the lawsuit. As you may have noticed, your competitors are actually
_competing_ instead of trying to bully themselves into a dominant
position with underhanded tactics.
Yours respectfully,
Michael Cope, former Amazon customer
--
"L'IT c'est moi!"
Did you mean 'hacker' or 'cracker'?
Do you know the diffrence? I don't think you do.
How does Roundeye's post get a 0, I think it deserves at least a 1, possibly a 2.
--
"L'IT c'est moi!"
If I could only figure out a way to bill my Slashdot time (competitive research? community outreach?), I'd be rich, rich I tell you!!!
--
"L'IT c'est moi!"
Easy way to do things. It checks out a bunch of sites and gives you the prices in ascending order. It gives you the shipping costs too.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Since just about everyone here seems to agree that this was a seriously LAME excuse for a patent, why not organize a serious boycott of amazon.com?
Those of us who run sites and link to amazon can post mildly informative pages explaining the mis-use of amazon's in place of those links. Those of us who use amazon for business can use other businesses (fatbrain among others).
It seems that The System is such that these types of tactics should at least attract some attention, if not help elicit some change.
1) Average software people shouldn't be afraid of software patents! Why? Because it usually is not worth the patent holder's time or money. In a crowded field, they may get a royalty for past sales (royalty = percentage * $0 = 0) anyways; and they can stop you in the future (injunction). But, What does this cost them? About $2+ million dollars. So, unless the prize is big or you are a direct competitor (BN v. Amazon), you shouldn't be afraid. (I'd be more afraid of red light runners or disgruntled husbands with guns!) 2) Don't know too much about the prior art but, read the claims of the patent. The Amazon patent requires a) the user to click a button and send data, b) then in response to the data the server pulls up other data (credit card, name). But if you use a "shopping cart" model, Amazon is barred from saying you infringe. Because the patent just issued, the potential $ is very small. What BN is really afraid of is the injunction. Seems to me that there is an easy way out for BN here. If I were BN, simply add the shopping cart model, and voila, no threat of injuction. 3) Just in reply to some other questions. The "art" the Examiner's at the PTO look at are only from BEFORE the time the patent application was filed. Makes sense, because the Examiner's are way over-loaded. For example, if you invented a great energy saving gadget and applied for a patent for it today, and next year Company A "invented" your same idea, you would still say you invented it first! When you get the patent, two years later (typical wait in the patent office) You would want to sue Company A to get royalties, wouldn't you? (Better yet, sign company A up with a license - suing should be a last resort). I don't think you would say that because compnay A came up with the idea before you got the patent, they can freely use you idea. So here, we have to look before the filing date of the patent, perhaps further, maybe January 1997 or eariler. 4) I've been following this debate for years now, and I get the feeling that people are afraid of software patents. As noted in 1) above, most people shouldn't be afraid. If people are nice, I'll check back and try to answer any questions people may have. The above is not legal advice :)
1) Average software people shouldn't be afraid of software patents! Why? Because it usually is not worth the patent holder's time or money. In a crowded field, they may get a royalty for past sales (royalty = percentage * $0 = 0) anyways; and they can stop you in the future (injunction). But, What does this cost them? About $2+ million dollars. So, unless the prize is big or you are a direct competitor (BN v. Amazon), you shouldn't be afraid. (I'd be more afraid of red light runners or disgruntled husbands with guns!) 2) Don't know too much about the prior art but, read the claims of the patent. The Amazon patent requires a) the user to click a button and send data, b) then in response to the data the server pulls up other data (credit card, name). But if you use a "shopping cart" model, Amazon is barred from saying you infringe. Because the patent just issued, the potential $ is very small. What BN is really afraid of is the injunction. Seems to me that there is an easy way out for BN here. If I were BN, simply add the shopping cart model, and voila, no threat of injuction. 3) Just in reply to some other questions. The "art" the Examiner's at the PTO look at are only from BEFORE the time the patent application was filed. Makes sense, because the Examiner's are way over-loaded. For example, if you invented a great energy saving gadget and applied for a patent for it today, and next year Company A "invented" your same idea, you would still say you invented it first! When you get the patent, two years later (typical wait in the patent office) You would want to sue Company A to get royalties, wouldn't you? (Better yet, sign company A up with a license - suing should be a last resort). I don't think you would say that because compnay A came up with the idea before you got the patent, they can freely use you idea. So here, we have to look before the filing date of the patent, perhaps further, maybe January 1997 or eariler. 4) I've been following this debate for years now, and I get the feeling that people are afraid of software patents. As noted in 1) above, most people shouldn't be afraid. If people are nice, I'll check back and try to answer any questions people may have. The above is not legal advice :)
1) Average software people shouldn't be afraid of software patents! Why? Because it usually is not worth the patent holder's time or money. In a crowded field, they may get a royalty for past sales (royalty = percentage * $0 = 0) anyways; and they can stop you in the future (injunction). But, What does this cost them? About $2+ million dollars. So, unless the prize is big or you are a direct competitor (BN v. Amazon), you shouldn't be afraid. (I'd be more afraid of red light runners or disgruntled husbands with guns!) ..................2) Don't know too much about the prior art but, read the claims of the patent. The Amazon patent requires a) the user to click a button and send data, b) then in response to the data the server pulls up other data (credit card, name). But if you use a "shopping cart" model, Amazon is barred from saying you infringe. Because the patent just issued, the potential $ is very small. What BN is really afraid of is the injunction. Seems to me that there is an easy way out for BN here. If I were BN, simply add the shopping cart model, and voila, no threat of injuction. ................3) Just in reply to some other questions. The "art" the Examiner's at the PTO look at are only from BEFORE the time the patent application was filed. Makes sense, because the Examiner's are way over-loaded. For example, if you invented a great energy saving gadget and applied for a patent for it today, and next year Company A "invented" your same idea, you would still say you invented it first! When you get the patent, two years later (typical wait in the patent office) You would want to sue Company A to get royalties, wouldn't you? (Better yet, sign company A up with a license - suing should be a last resort). I don't think you would say that because compnay A came up with the idea before you got the patent, they can freely use you idea. So here, we have to look before the filing date of the patent, perhaps further, maybe January 1997 or eariler. ...............4) I've been following this debate for years now, and I get the feeling that people are afraid of software patents. As noted in 1) above, most people shouldn't be afraid. If people are nice, I'll check back and try to answer any questions people may have. The above is not legal advice :)
To: feedback@amazon.com Subject: Delete My Account Please delete my account from your systems. With your absurd suit against Barnes and Noble I will no longer need this account. P.S. - Be careful of hitting the One-Step "Reply" button in your mail reader. I may have patented it.
:)
NEVER! Have someone retain your CC information. What happens when they get hacked and that database gets stolen? Ack! I always opt to store my shipping information--but never my CC info. :)
They lost me with the advent of Community Preferences, or whatever the hell that was that let everyone see the most popular purchases of my "group."
My point is, it's not like Amazon hasn't done (and won't eventually do) something to piss everyone off (for good) at least once. And so will Barnes and Noble. As far as the lawsuit goes, noone's worthy of our sympathy here. They're each mega-congloms looking to profit from my literature jones. Nothing says I have to let them. So I don't shop at Barnes and Noble anymore, either. And I hope they litigate each other to death - maybe some small bookstores will thrive in their absence.
_____
_____
The antidote to bad speech is not censorship, but more speech.
Well, they never sued anyone over that CSS patent.
Why? What's the difference here?
Well, amazon only has a few patents, and no real likelyhood for developing a vast quantity more.
Microsoft, on the other hand, has more patents (this was by no means a thourough search) and the potential to accrue a great deal more IP, including a fair amount which might be considered by you or me to be bogus.
Microsoft can use theses bogus IP claims to muscle little guys who cannot afford decent legal representation, or to procure small favors which would be less costly to a large corp than proving a patent bogus. By being carefull who they bring to court, MS can do their best to ensure that their IP is never closely scrutinzed, and that a whole mess of current and potential future bogus IP isn't removed from their possesion.
Microsoft is carefull so that they can continue to benefit from bogus IP.
Amazon has very little to gain from bogus IP, now or in the future. It serves them very little to sit on their one-click patent and try to muscle other corps for their ecommerce solution. It was probably something of a tossup to them whether they should sue or not.
Hypothetical amazon.com board room discussion:
So, Amazon has little to loose, and a great deal to gain. It is very worth their while to sue.
It is also good for us that they sue provided that the right thing happens, and they also loose.
A loss in this suit would give nice legal precidence for folks to use when standing up to the bogus IP muscling by folks like MS.
Hmmm.... I wonder if BN will settle out of court, paying funds to Amazon.com after a mysterious "investment" from MS... or maybe just an anonymous source.
-matt
After sending a relatively polite letter to them and receiving an inadequate form letter response back, I have sent them a "nasty" letter (nasty in the sense it has the tone of a cease-and-desist letter) that essentially says they are to remove my personal information from their database(s), and warning them that such information is my property and that if they don't remove it from their database(s) that "appropriate" legal action will be taken.
Hopefully they appreciate a dose of their own medicine (using the law just to piss off others you don't like).
I encourage others to do the same. Enough of those types of letters and Jeff Bezos will have to notice.
The great thing about the Internet is that it is a wonderful activism tool. You can organize thousands or even millions of people in a relatively short time.
YYAAL
You can't sue the government without their permission. You can try writing a nice letter to the USPTO asking permission to sue, maybe they'll even grant it, they might be more in favor of getting rid of software patents than we think.
IANAL, I don't know who can give permission.
I was reading through the transcript of a public hearing on prior art. It sounds like when a patent is submitted people look for prior art in current patent databases (including some foreign databases). They also try to review what they call "non-patent literature" (NPL). This information consists of abstracts from "technical journals" and, if needed, an "information specialist" can assist the person in researching prior art. They did mention that in the field of computers the NPL databases may or may not contain evidence of prior art.
In the public hearing it was stated that there is a law "so-called Rule 56, which requires that that material prior art, of which the applicant is aware, be disclosed to the Office." It was said that they understand that it may be hard to comply to this rule. I looked through the patent but I could not find any references to prior art. Maybe someone else knows where these types of things are posted (if they are disclosed)? It was said that most patent submissions include (on average) about 4 documents of prior art.
In the transcript Keith Stephens nicely explains the need to disclose all prior art... It would be interesting to know how much prior art Amazon.com submitted for this "1-Click" patent.
So it seems even if there is prior art that this does not stop it from being patented if it is "sufficiently different" (see below). So exactly what role does prior art play in the patent process then?
From the excellent document What can be patented it states that abstract ideas are not patentable. So if "buying things remotely with one action" is an abstract idea, then the key in Amazon's patent must be the interaction between the client, server, and "communication medium" as well as supporting technologies (ex. read in the patent about combining single orders into one order: "expedited order selection"). So it may be that these less abstract ideas are enforceable, but then again at the top of the document the "claims" that were made were very general.
From the same document referenced in the above paragraph it also states that "The subject matter sought to be patented must be sufficiently different from what has been used or described before that it may be said to be nonobvious to a person having ordinary skill in the area of technology related to the invention." So another question I pose is when did Amazon "invent" this type of ordering system? Surely "sufficiently similiar" systems could be found before Amazon "invented" its ordering system.
Notice also that the patent states that "one skilled in the art" will appreciate that the patent also covers other ordering mechanisms such as email. This is incredulous... this means that the patent convers all automated email-based order processing systems!
On a side note, on the US Patent and Trademark Office's web site in the definition of a patent they state that "US patent grants are effective only within the US, US territories, and US possessions." How exactly can this relate to the internet? What if a U.S. company contracts with a foreign (ex. European) company to create an e-commerce web site that remembers users credit cards and allows buying an item with one click of a button. Would the patent affect the web site because a U.S. company sponsered the development of the site OR would it not be under the umbrella of the patent since it was hosted in the foreign company?
The issues of patents is a tough one, and hopefully we can work through (around) situations like this Amazon patent and somehow manage to let innovation flourish still. The idea of (software) patents is really against the entire concept backing Open Source. The real question is, what should be done about it?
-Kevin
Or how bout a mysterious investment from the slashdot foundation to pay for some legal fees :) heheh
Dear Michael,
Thank you for writing to us at Amazon.com.
As you know, Amazon.com has filed suit against barnesandnoble.com,
saying it has illegally copied Amazon.com's patented 1-Click
technology.
The 1-Click feature securely stores billing and shipping information
so that returning customers need only click their mouse once to buy a
selected item. In recognition of the innovative and unique nature of
the 1-Click technology, the U.S. Patent Office awarded Patent
No. 5,960,411 to Amazon.com on September 28, 1999.
Amazon.com spent thousands of hours to develop the 1-Click process.
As our founder, Jeff Bezos, has said, "The reason we have a patent
system in this country is to encourage people to take these kinds of
risks and make these kinds of investments for customers."
I hope you'll understand that we are unable to discuss this case any
further as we are currently in litigation. Thank you for taking the
time to share your views with us. Best regards,
SomeGuy (changed to protect the messenger)
Amazon.com
Earth's Biggest Selection
http://www.amazon.com/
Basically I think this is such a load of horseshit but what do you expect from a big corporation beside marketing speak.
Malice95
When amazon did their product circles thing. A lot of people wrote letters and now it is an option to opt-out. I don't think that simple letters are going to do this but IMHO Amazon is responsive to customers, knowing how easy it is to go too another site.
So write those letters (no not a DOS attack :-)) and let your voice be heard.
Aaron "PooF" Matthews
E-mail: aaron@fish.pathcom.com
To mail me remove "fish."
ICQ: 11391152
Quote: "Success is the greatest revenge"
This is the letter I sent to Amazon.com in response to this... I would really appreciate it if we could give some sort of forum to the responses that Amazon gives out. I'm rather curious to see how these are answered, if they come up with some sort of scripted response, or if they actually take the time to write out a response, or if they don't respond at all. Let's try and not "drop this" like most other topics get done. Once it's off the front page != old news. Also, I'm not opposed to anyone sending me an email at Issue9mm@hotmail.com to keep me updated with their replies, or status of an inquiry. Thanks,
-i9mm-
To Whom This May Concern,
I am writing in regards to Patent # 5,960,411. First and foremost, let me say that I feel this is a FAR over-reached patent, and should, quite honestly, never have been approved by the U.S. Patent Office. However, since I must contend with the fact that it WAS granted, for whatever idiotic reason, that your (mis)use of it is most blatantly WRONG.
I contend that you are using this patent for no other reason than to keep Barnes & Noble from competing, an act, which Microsoft may well teach you, will eventually make you a monopoly (read - monopoly bad). I can tell you, that while I have chosen to shop at your site for quite some time now, and placed great deals of money into your hands, it is NOT because of your "1-Click" shopping. Yes, it's convenient, but not innovative. Quite frankly, I would much rather enter my information EACH AND EVERY time, than to have you sell customers' private information to outside parties (which I tolerated).
In addition to the quality of product, service, and ability to find those hard to find items, I shopped with Amazon because it made a stake on the web when prior one had not been made. I chose to shop with Amazon because of its pioneering attitude, and willingness to explore. I chose Amazon, because it made me feel like part of something better than brick-and-mortar, better than pushy salespeople, better than congested stores. Part of a team almost.
Now, looking at your bully-ish tactics, doing whatever it takes to secure your foot hold in the online economy, I shudder to think what I've become part of.
Your competitors are competing, this is what makes them good. I am not saying that you are not, because you are. You ARE a quality service provider if ever there was one. I simply cannot allow myself to become part of this lunacy.
To sum up... I will not spend another DIME at Amazon.com until matters are resolved. If legal action ensues, and B&N actually has the guts to stick up for themselves against a far over-reaching and too-broad patent, I will most likely take my business to them. If, at some point, Amazon decides to do the right thing, chances are, they'll win my business back.
Good luck, it's all on you.
Until this is over with, Barry Melton
I haven't had a chance to read the previous comments on this topic, but I think probably the best thing we could all see in the freeware community is for two diametrically opposed colossi to battle this matter (and others like it-- You hearing me , IBM? You're against the ropes. Time to FIGHT! You can afford lawyers, dammit! Do The Right Thing! You used to!) out in the courts to the bitter end. ..... quality!
Settlements create 'conventions' with no real case law behind them. We need real, honest-to-god *judgements* with some serious meat behind them to put a cessation to all this pointless wheel-spinning.
Intellectual Property law is starting to get seriously obscene. Som yutz can take a blood sample from me and patent *MY FUCKING GENES*! MINE! I'd have to PAY to get the benefits of my own genetic content!
That last crack is no joke. It's law.
Shit like this has to be stopped. We can stop it. Don't cooperate. As geeks, we create this technology. We own it. It's ours.
Give your PHB's some shit now and then. Let 'em know who's REALLY boss, should we choose to take that mantle back.
Sure we'd suck at it, but at least we'd care about
This question is hard to solve, but we have a role in making it happen. Let's all stop hiding. Is there a way we could all make a point to these bozos in a gentle yet 'we MEAN business' manner?
So they know a real Atlas Shrugged scenario is at the end of it?
If all the bucks in electronic banking stopped flying at once, that might do it. After all, most of our current apparent prosperity is based on monetary differentials. If the buck stopped, that fiction would be exposed immediately. Could be a good thing, actually...
Hmmmm...
MUST STOP GODLIKE THOUGHT PATTER^&*(
---NO CARRIER---
Brak: What's THAT?
Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
I thought I was pissed when I realized that Amazon was trying to patent an idea that probably occured to anyone who bought anything on the web more than once (Why do I need to go through all this crap again? Don't they already have my account info?). It got worse when I realized they were patenting cookies (that's it? No fancy shmancy algorithm, no magnificent feat of scripting genius, no originality) that I got really livid and sent them a letter advising them of my decision to boycott their company and start a chain letter which I shall forward to all my friends asking them to boycott Amazon. This is what I received in reply...makes me wanna puke.. Not especially the use of the words innovative and unique.
Thank you for writing to us at Amazon.com.
As you know, Amazon.com has filed suit against barnesandnoble.com, saying it has illegally copied Amazon.com's patented 1-Click technology.
The 1-Click feature securely stores billing and shipping information so that returning customers need only click their mouse once to buy a selected item. In recognition of the innovative and unique nature of the 1-Click technology, the U.S. Patent Office awarded Patent No. 5,960,411 to Amazon.com on September 28, 1999.
Amazon.com spent thousands of hours to develop the 1-Click process. As our founder, Jeff Bezos, has said, "The reason we have a patent system in this country is to encourage people to take these kinds of risks and make these kinds of investments for customers."
I hope you'll understand that we are unable to discuss this case any further as we are currently in litigation. Thank you for taking the time to share your views with us.
Best regards,
Titus G.
Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/
Earth's Biggest Selection
=========================
Bad Command or File Name Go In The Corner Till U Learn Some Manners Carnage
Bad Command Or File Name
I'm very surprised that old billy boy hasn't patented "1 click computing" for his craptive desktop that is included with IE4.0...
smash
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
If someone wants to set up a web page about a boycott of Amazon we can try to get it going. Shouldn't be too hard to promote, if anyone is interested. I'd like to make a stand against this bully and his lawsuit but html and art is not my strong point. Post the URL here, if you'd like to give the web page a shot and then we could decide on a site and get the word out to the masses!
Is anyone really suprised by this? I was counting the days until the lawsuit was announced. Amazon wasted not a precious second.
This and their last 'what your domain is buying?' fiasco shows you exactly what brain-donors are in charge there. I'm expecting a lot of intelligent consumers to start buying from B&N, then again I'm still waiting for everyone to leave Microsoft.
ScaryThought: With the right jury they might pull this off. Call Johnnie Cochran!
These online bookstores suck! Go to http://www.sdtb.com San Diego Technical Books has a better site and customer service.
I have a big bag full of two cents and I'm coming your way.
Indirectly boycotting online bookstores anyway. But for one or two obsure titles I've bought from Spree, I have pretty much avoided it... Why? Allow me to give you a list:
This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.
MOO;IANAL.
There used to be a picture linked here.
I believe Amazon's Patent No. US5960411 is a textbook case of an unenforcable patent. If B&N's lawyers aren't total idiots, they'll tear it apart on the grounds of 35 USC 102 (a) - novelty, and 35 USC 103 (a) - non-obvious subject matter (prior art). Anybody, who's interested in that subject, may want to read this: "Avoiding Patent Potholes" by M. Chu/P. Wied, USC Computer Law Institute, 1999. I'm generally a software patent supporter, but you have to take the bad with the good. (anonymous coward) Mike
Does anybody remember when Amazon was being sued by WalMart because Amazon hired away quite a few of WalMart's key computer personnel? WalMart got screwed. Does anybody remember a little while ago that Barnes and Noble tried to buy Ingram publishers thus having control over the prices they could charge to their competitors. The government was thinking that day and the buyout never happened. B&N is certainly not the "little bookstore on the corner" that they are trying to get us to believe they are. I do believe B&N charges one price at the store and another at their website. Please don't feel sorry for B&N because the are a huge huge corporation run by greedy men and women just like Amazon.
I have a big bag full of two cents and I'm coming your way.
Either you never win anything or you grew up in a large family, because that is just childish.
I have a big bag full of two cents and I'm coming your way.