Tue 24 Oct 2006
IBM Sues Amazon for Selling Goods Online (or something like that)
Posted by Greg under Litigation, News, Patents
IBM is suing Amazon over its alleged abuse of IBM ecommerce and customer customization technologies. The court filings are not yet public anywhere that I can find (on the ridiculous Texas Eastern District Website), but the patents allegedly violated are:
- US 5,796,967 - Presenting Applications in an Interactive Service.
- US 5,442,771 - Storing Data in an Interactive Network.
- US 7,072,849 - Presenting Advertising in an Interactive Service.
- US 5,446,891 - Adjusting Hypertext Links with Weighted User Goals and Activities.
- US 5,319,542 - Ordering Items Using an Electronic Catalogue.
The most thorough article that I could find summarizing the implications is at BusinessWeek:
IBM seems to have come down on both sides of this issue. In December, the company filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Metabolite Laboratories, arguing that method patents have been overdone, and acknowledging that some of its own business-method patents may be invalid. “I will be looking to see if IBM has had a change of heart since last December,” says attorney James W. Dabney, partner at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP.
From Monsters and Critics:
‘We filed this case for a very simple reason. IBM`s property is being knowingly and unfairly exploited,’ said Dr. John E. Kelly III, senior vice president of IBM Technology and Intellectual Property. ‘IBM is one of the world`s leading creators of intellectual property and one of the most progressive in embracing new, highly collaborative ways of driving and managing innovation.
I’ll post more when I can either read the briefs or summarize a lawyer who has. My initial reaction is similar to that or The Register:
Mercifully, a quick search of the United States Patent and Trademark Office revealed that IBM does not appear to hold a patent on the entire concept of ecommerce.
Another PR strike against the kindly open source giant.
UPDATE 11/8/2006
This article has a great line about the case:
In the Amazon case, the stakes are high. IBM’s patents include “storing data in an interactive network,” “ordering items using an electronic catalogue” and “presenting advertising in an interactive service”. These could be considered fundamental to e-commerce on the web. If the patents stand up, it could let IBM impose what amounts to a tax on online shopping.
6 Responses to “ IBM Sues Amazon for Selling Goods Online (or something like that) ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from Andrew Ferrier’s Blog » Blog Archive » Ideas Are Assets
October 25th, 2006 at 3:14 am[...] Update 2006-10-25: Greg at IBM Eye has more details on the suit. [...]
-
Pingback from Advanced Technology Products Interactive » Blog Archive » Another patent story.
November 7th, 2006 at 4:18 am[...] People talking: Ian Jindal, John Battelle, Reuters, ipcentral, IBM eye, Medibistro, ftcom, againstmonopoly, the nose. Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
October 24th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Have you even read the patents? Obviously the Business Week reporter just interviewed the Amazon lawyer, and the Register reporter probably just looked at Slashdot and stole one of their sarcasm posts. Actually reading them is quite a different experience.
These patents are not “business methods”. All but one of them are from Prodigy (nee Trintex) which was, for its time, a highly advanced online interactive system. They describe ways to handle massive numbers of users accessing a large set of online distributed data.
October 24th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
I read the first couple paragraphs of each. IBM publicly professes to only enforce patents with considerable technical merit - not those derided for being overly generic. My initial skepticism has to do with attempting to own such a large force in world commerce. Kudos to IBM if the patent is enforceable, but if it were clear cut, it seems that IBM would have made a bigger deal out of this sooner (like 1995) and collected royalties from the skillions of DB driven interactive retailers. I\’ll follow up when I learn more.
I\’ve really appreciated your last couple comments. They\’ve added a lot to what I\’d written.
October 24th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
Kudos to IBM if the patent is enforceable, but if it were clear cut, it seems that IBM would have made a bigger deal out of this sooner (like 1995) and collected royalties from the skillions of DB driven interactive retailers.
How do you know they haven’t? It’s not like patent licensing or cross-licensing deals are announced in the trade press, generally. I would imagine these particular patents have been involved in lots and lots of business discussions.
I should say I’m an IBMer but I do not have “inside info” on this in any way, shape or form.
Apparently, Amazon just blew off IBM’s approaches. I guess we’ll see whether that was a wise business decision.
October 25th, 2006 at 6:17 pm
I don’t.
Patent royalties aren’t broken out or itemized by IBM in financial releases. I don’t think IBM has ever made news enforcing these patents and I’ve been involved with 2 DB driven Internet retailers and to my knowledge, neither paid any sort of royalties to IBM.