Australian Gov't Moves To Block E-commerce Patent 103
ColaMan writes "Surfacing in the Australian version of GoogleNews,
moves are afoot to block a patent covering (it seems) general ecommerce practices on the internet. This comes after the recent strongarm tactics against New Zealand businesses by D.E. Technologies , holder of the patent overseas."
Patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Rus
Re:e-Commerce patents? (Score:5, Insightful)
The western, industrialized nations are the biggest ecom players, so it really doesn't matter if some 3rd world nation is using the same patented methods with their software. You have to follow the trail of money on this one. It's a double-edged sword. You can get away with it, but then you can't conduct business in places where the trademark is effective (consequently this is where the biggest market is)
Re:Abuse, once more... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is really depressing, considering there are firms whose sole purpose is to beat the game and patent inevitable technology ahead of everyone else, which in turn, hampers technological progress.
The whole system is fucked beyond recognition.
Re:e-Commerce patents? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is kind of like asking "how is it possible that the government locks everyone with the letter 'e' in their name to prison?" Stupid things can be done. If a government agency grants a patent to such a method and other governments in the world agree and assist with enforcing it, then it is possible.
This has, of course, nothing to do with the purpose of the patent system. The purpose of patent system is to make inventors to share their inventions with the general public. In return, the general public grants the inventor an exclusive right to the method for a limited time. However, nowadays the idea of benefit to the general public has been completely lost.
Re:e-Commerce patents? (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case , D.E. technologies has patented this method in 32 countries so far.
How the hell this could get past 32 patent offices without getting the great big "Get Fucked" stamp on it is beyond me.
Patent Approval == Death to Small Businesses..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Not too suprising (Score:4, Insightful)
By the way, I've been wondering about something. In general a patent covers a specific method of doing something. Like, a mouse trap is only covering that specific system, not the concept of catching mice.
With that MSN IM translation patent, shouldn't it only cover that method translating IMs? So if you were to figure out another way to do it, you'd be in the clear? Or with the one-click patent, does that patent cover "A method of buying stuff on the internet (with one click)" or is it "A method of buying stuff with one click (and here's some software to do it)"? If you implemented one-click shopping via some other method, wouldn't you be in the clear?
Re:There goes my business (Score:2, Insightful)
"If no one else can figure out how the heck you do it, then you can patent it". Once you've patented it, then people can licence it off you.
Re:Questionable step. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've seen US protectionism in IT year after year, and the entire world is locked into US-led companies such as Microsoft. Just last week, an Australian state wrote to reassure a software 'choice' thinktank (headed, of course, by Microsoft) that we wouldn't look at open source, but would lap up their software, pay through the nose for it and wag our tails like good doggies.
You'll have to forgive some of us who may not believe that the interests of the US are somehow magically the interests of the rest of the planet. Certainly the US feels no compunction to act honorably on any other agreements we may sign with them.
Think being a US ally gives us any advantages? Well, we're entering another round of 'free trade' negotiations (really, trying to get the US government to be a little less blatantly protectionist in regards to their agricultural and livestock industries) so we'll have to wait and see. I have a hard time seeing any favour we gain, over and above nations such as China (with their appalling human rights record, but their massive potential market).
We certainly don't get cheap oil, or if we do, the consumers never see any benefits (maybe the foreign owned oil companies get those benefits, flowing the profits back to England and the US). Our prices at the pump are higher than the US (allowing for exchange rates), so I'd have to say that you're wrong on that too.
Lastly, if the Australian government is looking out for Australian interests, that's actually a good thing. I know that the US gov't does the same thing for US interests, at the expense of any other nation.
If it comes down to screwing a US company over, then I say it's about time. I'm sick of seeing our business fail because of US gov't money propping up business that can't really compete on the level playing field that the US promotes but never actually attempts; I'm sick of seeing our gov't do every single blasted thing the US asks without question; I'm sick of seeing US interests driving our IT departments across this nation.
Apart from that tirade though, this is a horrible thing to patent, and makes a mockery of the entire patent system. Last year, someone managed to patent the wheel as a joke. This is a bit more complex, but is almost as foolish.
Re:There goes my business (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Abuse, once more... (Score:2, Insightful)
Like the Neem tree or parts of the human genome.
too late (Score:3, Insightful)
It happened first in the country called USA, who is the leader of the word economy, the country where most of government workers (if not most of citizens in general) lack seriously their education. After it (business method patenting) becomes a common practice in the US Patent Office it's too late to change anything in other (2nd world?) countries. Everyone else has to comply or be ready of being slashed by US Government, the government of corporations and for corporations.
Re:Abuse, once more... (Score:3, Insightful)
Urban myth. The Neem tree is not patented, nor are 'parts of the human genome'.
The famous 'Neem tree patent' is actually a patent on a fungicidal formulation based on purified extracts from Neem seeds. The patent on that formulation has been ruled invalid by the EU but may still be in force in the US. There are NO patents on the tree itself, or on use of Neem seeds in traditional roles.
As far as patents on the human genome, what is patentable are isolated, purified genetic sequences where the claimant can demonstrate a creditable use for the purified genetic material.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.
The fact is that neither the fungicidal formulation of Neem tree seed extract, nor the purified genetic material have been around for many thousands of years. Both are the result of modern scientific invention.
The fact is that patents on living organisms or parts thereof have been granted for over 100 years. It is NOT a new practice and has been proven valid over a long period of time. Louis Pasteur received U.S. a patent in 1873, claiming a purified form of yeast.
The concept that patents do not cover discoveries is also baloney - the language in the Constitution itself clearly uses the word discoveries.
Worthy of a patent (Score:2, Insightful)
uspto.gov.
An international transaction system for operation over the internet/intranet provides a pre-transactional calculation of all charges involved in any international transaction. Upon the option of the customer, the goods can be viewed on catalogue sheets translated to a language of the customer's choice, and the price provided in a currency selected by the customer. The customer also has the option of initiating the order with automatic credit authorization, generation of an electronic title or commercial invoice and arrangements and payment of shipping charges and any taxes and import/export duties
All the people with small businesses saying they can't afford such technology should relax. This is all about importing/exporting. I doubt small businesses are going to be worried about losing the handful of sales to someone in Timbuctoo.
Anyone with large enough export volumes would rather buy a licensed product than develop one themselves to do all the things specified in the abstract.
If a small business has so much exporting that they need to use software to automate sales - well, you won't be small for long.
The software under patent is complex enough to automate many activities required by the bureaucracy in international trade. That's creditable, not obvious.
What we can do (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't wait for someone like Amazon to be served notice over this patent. Hopefully it will be squashed like a little pest that it is.
I mean, what's next? A patent on discussion boards such as /.?
DE Technologies, Business plan. (Score:3, Insightful)
Too bad Canada, Americas largest trading partner, hasn't got the balls to stand up and say enough of this bullsquat. I am afraid that the country I love has become another spineless, leave sleaping dogs lie, puppet. The future of commerce and innovation is in jeopardy if we alow this rediculous sherade to continue.