Forum OpenACS Q&A: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments

Collapse
1: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments
Posted by Talli Somekh on 02/26/03 05:54 PM
For those who don't read Slashdot (and shame on you if you don't):

United States Patent 6,525,747
Bezos February 25, 2003
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method and system for conducting a discussion relating to an item

Abstract

A method and system for conducting an electronic discussion relating to a topic. The discussion system of the present invention receives a selection of an item that is to be the topic of the discussion. The discussion system then receives comments relating to the selected item and generates a message that includes a description of the selected item and the received comments. The discussion system then sends the generated message to participants of the discussion. The discussion system receives from a participant who received the generated message additional comments that are to be added to the generated message. The discussion system sends the generated message along with received additional comments to the participants of the discussion.

I doubt we'll get sued, but think about poor photo.net!!!

talli

Collapse
2: Re: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments (response to 1)
Posted by David Walker on 02/26/03 06:07 PM
Eve's code is dated June 1999.  Amazon's file date for the patent is August 1999.  Motion to dismiss, your honor.
Collapse
3: Re: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments (response to 1)
Posted by Tom Jackson on 02/26/03 06:43 PM

Anyway, you need to read the claims. They may be so narrow when the patent is finally granted as to be useless. The abstract is written when the patent is applied for.

Collapse
5: Re: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments (response to 1)
Posted by Tom Jackson on 02/26/03 08:16 PM

So claim one is very very narrow. First it must apply to an item for sale. Second, the discussion must be be started by the computer method and the participant must provide one or more other participants (names/email) to join the discussion. Those other participants must be spammed with the description of the item, the initial discussion and a link that would allow the other participant to buy the item... But there are still other details in claim one which must all be followed to infringe the patent claim. It looks like the other claims are further limitations on claim one, so they are even more narrow.

Collapse
6: Re: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments (response to 1)
Posted by Alfred Essa on 02/26/03 09:12 PM
The US patent system is screwed. During the heyday of dot.com, we were approached by a prominent consulting company. They wanted to partner with us on e-Learning. At that time, everyone in their mother was jockeying in the space. To make an impression, they showed me a long list of patents they had taken out related to pedagogy. Many of them were graned. One of them made by jaw drop. They had essentially patented the "socratic method".

So, beware. If you teach using the socratic method, you might need to pay royalties.

Collapse
7: Re: We're screwed! Amazon patents General Comments (response to 1)
Posted by Don Baccus on 02/26/03 10:26 PM
The patent problem is one that feeds on itself.

Patents are being issued so liberally that companies like Amazon fear an IP company will sneak in patents then sue (as happened to the SDRAM industry and the RAMBUS company, whose only assets are a suite of patents bought from various hardware design companies)

So companies now preempt by filing patents.  Feedback loop, oh my!