Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Patents The Almighty Buck Your Rights Online

Business Process Patents Taking The World By Storm 51

Posted by timothy from the not-the-nice-kind-of-storm dept.
Siriaan writes "DE Technologies, a company based in Montreal, has hit a number of web retailers in the U.S., New Zealand and Singapore with patent infringement claims covering such things as purchase histories and online currency conversion. A small wooden model kit firm my company does business with is amongst those hit; they received a demand for a US$10,000 'signing fee' and then 1.5 percent of all transactions ongoing. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Business Process Patents Taking The World By Storm More

Business Process Patents Taking The World By Storm

Comments Filter:

  • 20 years at a stand still. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Godeke ( 32895 ) * on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @12:16AM (#6398230)
    If this kind of thing is allowed to continue, I suspect that the world's economies will spend the next two decades in a sort of "dark ages" where only the largest companies will be able to do business. Note that the targets of these insane patent suits are always the little guys, because there is no expectation that they can fight back. Once the big companies realize that they can get away with this kind of abuse of the patent system, you will likely see a flurry of activity where large companies simply outlaw competition via absurd licensing fees on things like "selling product (via common, but not yet patented channel)" or "maintaining a customer list (in a DATABASE)". I mean, feel the innovation!

    Makes me ill.

    • Organized crime will flourish too[1]. I'm sure many of the "little guys" will start up illegal businesses because that is the only way they'll be able to get by...

      [1] I mean traditional organized crime--I suppose most of today's large corporations can be considered organized crime as well.

    • Re:20 years at a stand still. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The problem is: Processes aren't marketable with patents and they aren't marketable without. Nevertheless they are becoming a key factor in economical success. Having a key factor evade the traditional investment-return philosophy is problematic for businesses. Patent advocates are right when they say that some businesses don't invest in development and profit from other businesses costly trial and error instead. Information, due to its non-existent marginal cost, isn't marketable. Patents are a way of marg
      • Shame this was posted as AC! Orginally patents were for an *implementation*. This meant that there were frequently ways to build a similar *acting* device, but it would bypass the patent because of the innovation in the mechansims. For example, a printing press has to apply ink to paper. The original flat plate method (if it had been patented) would have perhaps created the market for rotory plates more quickly, and thus the patent system would have *supported* innovation.

        Now all you have to do is patent a

  • Any legitimate Business Process Patents? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Flying-Cow-Man ( 686404 ) on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @12:25AM (#6398266)
    Seriousy, I have had some long chats to my (lawyer) brother about this. Has anybody heard of any real, legitimate, honest-to-goodness, business process patents that have been granted and licensed?

    Obviously, being an engineer, I believe that technical processes should also be public domain...
  • Software patents are bullshit. "Process" patents are bullshit. Lawyers will take advantage of this bullshit to extort money. Unless you're richer than the suing party, you have no chance of winning. Either pay up, stop violating the patent(s), or move to a non-fatally-fucked-up country where such asinine patents remain illegal. The game is OVER here in the US (and soon the EU) for everyone but the big corporations, though most of the sheep haven't figured it out yet.
    • I made a joke about this above, but some "process" patents are legitimate, such as technical processes. Do you know how hard it is to figure out how to get strained silicon to grow on a sapphire substrate in usable quantities, but still able to carry a current? Some of these processes involved a great deal of hard work and ingenuity, and that should be respected.

      After all, there's no such thing as "One-Click Silicon."
      • There's a big difference between manufacturing process patents and business process patents. The scenario you describe is obviously a manufacturing process - and I'd have no problems with anyone patenting that kind of thing.

        OTOH, patenting a business process (like providing purchase history, or remembering customer information between visits a la "One-Click") is completely the opposite. Saying "You can't offer that service to your customers because we're the ones who own it - we'll license it to you if y
        • BTW Your patents have to be novel as in they have not been done before. These monkies first registered their patent in 1996/7 or some such before this was a big deal. It has only just been accepted. Your idea would not work because it is not novel at the time of application. A NZ lawyer commented that the patent will probably be nullified because it will be shown to not be a novel process. IMHO it should not matter, this who concept is utterly ridiculous! The world has gone insane on this issue and it is
    • Either pay up, stop violating the patent(s), or move to a non-fatally-fucked-up country where such asinine patents remain illegal.

      Well this particular issue is going on in New Zealand; we're starting to run out of places. Is Canada the only remaining option?

  • Safe Haven(Co) (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thecampbeln ( 457432 ) on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @12:32AM (#6398290) Homepage
    The more I read these stories about the abuse of the American (and now international) patent system(s), the more I believe things like HavenCo [havenco.com] and Sealand [sealandgov.com] have a good idea behind them. Until it gets really bad, I suppose you could simply move your site hosting from country to country, but for the love of god when will this end? As a little guy software developer with a site (shameless plug - NanoWeb [nanowebserver.com], but it needs an update) I am beginning to fear that my after hours source of a little play money could get me into legal trouble for using techniques and technologies that have been used collectively on the net for years! We thought the "Microsoft Tax" was bad, how about making up for the 1.5% patent taxes?

    • Re:Safe Haven(Co) (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Basje ( 26968 )
      International? EU has postponed their laws on the subject. They might well be rejected now. (one can always hope)

      America being pushy on the subject doesn't really help either. There's a growing resentment of the US bullying around European countries. This may well be the downfall of said legislation over here.
      • International? EU has postponed their laws on the subject. They might well be rejected now. (one can always hope)
        It looks more and more likely that the compromise will be that
        novel software patents will be allowed, though business patents will not. I'd be very surprised if something like this could ever be patented in Europe.
      • Don't I recall that the WTO (World Trade Organization) requires all signing parties to accept rather strong versions of each others' copyright/patent systems, such that patents automatically become international the moment they're national ... so long as you're in a WTO-signing country? I could easily be mistaken (or misled by reading too much /.?)
        • I believe you are right, although I too am unsure about the details of this agreement. This is how it ended up in NZ. However, in NZ, a patent can be easily nullified if it is found to not be as novel as the limp wristed US patent office said it was. :o) As per usual this costs money and lawyers and the dogs of law are again released and make a killing.

    • Sealand again? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by fm6 ( 162816 )
      Well, if you believe a con artist squatting on an abandoned radar platform is a "country", then I guess the absence of a Sealand Army or Navy to defend your server from terrorists or process servers won't bother you.

      Oh, and are you planning to go live there yourself? Otherwise your own body is subject to laws where it physically exists. You can park your data on Pluto, it doesn't make your physical self immune from U.S. laws.

      However! A consular passport will give you diplomatic immunity! For a very smal

      • Not quite correct. Your COMPANY is subject to the laws where it is formed. You are merely an employee/director of said company. Small difference, but a very important one.

        • YANAL? (Score:2)

          by fm6 ( 162816 )
          So, I can legally rob liquor stores by hiring on with a company that's incorporated in another country that sanctions such activity? Cool!
          • Very excellant example of a straw man argument,congratulations. Your companies dealings and business processes are in another country and so the act is not actually occuring in the country you reside in. In the silly case that you described, you would be personally responsible for any liquor stores you ripped off, regardless of who you said you did it for. I sometimes don't know why I bother....
            • ...but I don't see how you can export your business process without exporting your business. If all your employees are in this country, then everything your employees do is under U.S. jurisdiction, no matter where your incorporation papers and servers are stashed.

              Since neither of us are lawyers, perhaps it would be more productive if you cited a case of a company that had employees in that were able to avoid a local law because they were incorporated somewhere else.

              • True that we are not lawyers. The law is of course an ass and it would probably be based on vague and impractical ways of reasoning anyway. :o) In the end it would come down to local laws on e-commuting internationally, which may or may not be well defined. It could depend on what country you are in, or what state.

  • 97? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by dammitallgoodnamesgo ( 631946 )
    The men behind DET's far-reaching patents, Ed Pool and Douglas Mauer, claim to be the first inventors to "computerise the ability to do international business transactions".
    Now, if I understand this right, until their "invention" you couldn't carry out international business transactions on the internet before '97? Now I'm fairly sure theres a mistake there...
    • You may have done international business transactions on the Internet before '97, but were they <doublespeak>computerised</doublespeak>??

  • Ignore them. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I Am Not A Lawyer, but it should be business as usual. File the letter away and ignore them. Their tactics disgust me - their patents should never have been accepted, they're trying to get away with extortion.

    It's nothing more than a modern-day form of a protection racket (with "signing fee" money up front to allow you to continue doing business).
    • Even though I wholeheartedly agree with you, this might simply not be an option.

      Depending on the laws of the country where you reside you must react to the extortion one way or another.

  • Patent (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dammitallgoodnamesgo ( 631946 ) on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @01:07AM (#6398390)
    In fact, looking at their white paper - the patent link is broken - the system they appear to have patented is a system which automatically adds any taxes you have to pay onto the bill (so, for instance, if the buyer is in Europe, adding on VAT). How on earth can you patent something like that?

    • Re:Patent (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mufasio ( 304185 )
      In fact, looking at their white paper - the patent link is broken - the system they appear to have patented is a system which automatically adds any taxes you have to pay onto the bill (so, for instance, if the buyer is in Europe, adding on VAT). How on earth can you patent something like that?

      I haven't read it yet but if this is so then I don't see how that could possibly be patentable. I recall seeing a debate on cspan or some similar news channel where they were discussing taxing the internet(i.e. pa
    • In fact, looking at their white paper - the patent link is broken - the system they appear to have patented is a system which automatically adds any taxes you have to pay onto the bill (so, for instance, if the buyer is in Europe, adding on VAT). How on earth can you patent something like that?

      Quite simply! All one has to do is patent the 'process' of addition! I can see it now...

      I have patented a process whereby you can take two different numbers, those numbers representing a quantity of money or item

  • *lol* (Score:1, Interesting)

    by siyavash ( 677724 )
    heh, no problem. You could just move your software and hosting to Asia. If they come near you, Just kill them. What will be next ? Patenting how to fuck a woman ?..."If you put your cock in a certain way into a womans ass/vagina, you have to pay us $10 for each penetration."...*lol*... I'm sure some mad guy will start to killing these patent holders soon... Trust me, it'll happen.

  • What to say. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @02:42AM (#6398646) Journal
    Sure we can rant on about how stupid this, how this proves the US patent system is long due for an overhaul.

    I haven't been reading slashdot for to long but this type of story seems to be a frequent feature and absolutly nothing seems to change about it. The real world just seems not to care and absolutly no precedent is being set to deter future cases of this disease. Is there no organisation that is willing to make a trail case out of this to create precedent so that future leeches will think twice before trying this?

    After all the one thing these stories have in common is that after they got a few little guys to pay up they vanish without a trace. They know that in a court they will be thrown out and will then have to pay any legal costs that have been mode by the other side. So they can only win against those that can't afford to make the initial lawyer investment.

    Sad really. Oh and americans, it won't belong till the next election. Try to vote for someone else then the guy promising the lowest taxes for once will you.

    • You're right, the "real world" doesn't care. They're too busy watching American Idol. Now if there's one area where competition-choking patents would produce a net benefit to society, it is so-called "reality television".

    • Is there no organisation that is willing to make a trail case out of this to create precedent so that future leeches will think twice before trying this?

      As long as these guys are smart enough to go after the small fish that can't afford to fight... no, there will be no precedent set.

      Although, if I were the target of one of these suits, I would seriously think about 1) 86ing the C&D letter, and 2) finding all the other small fish that violate the patent and trying to set up a defense pool (anonymous

  • eh (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    And there isn't even possible to patent business methods in Canada.

    Talk about double standards, eh.
    • That's why the have a U.S. Patent and not a Canadian Patent. If you check the web site(http://www.detechnologies.com/contact.htm), they also have 2 Offices in VA.

  • bleh (Score:1)

    by asdfx ( 446164 )
    I think as soon as anyone fights this, the patent(s) will be nullified. This is like patenting the idea to hand out a receipt. I could see patenting your register technology, but the receipt (or invoice in this case) long predates the internet. Surely, the idea of international computerized commerce existed long (long being relative to the age of the internet) before they applied for the patent. This is an unreasonable form of leeching.

    if this works, then there needs to be serious reconsideration of cu

  • Let it happen. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by clambake ( 37702 ) on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @04:51AM (#6398935) Homepage
    Fighting it will only prolong the amount of time that humanity is going to have to suffer due to patents. Making small gains is actually a detriment to the anti-patent movement, because all that does it legitimize the system while allowing it to perpetuate. Instead, let these things happen. Let somone patent a business process for "a way of exchanging currency or credit for good or services", or let someone get the software patent for "performing bit manipulation of various forms on a 'computing' device".

    Just remember, the old saw, "never cost anyone more money than they are willing to pay to have you killed". It applies to business too. Once you start costing enough money to business then they'll do whatever it takes to make sure you don't survive. If you are costing a corporation more money that it costs to buy a congressman or two, then you need to be prepared to find your business model suddenly become illegal or heavily regulated.
    • Yeah...but that's like saying let spammers keep spamming...and let telemarketeers keep calling...how long has it taken now for telemarketeers to be forced to use a "Do Not Call" List by law?

  • Counter patent! (Score:4, Funny)

    by ikeleib ( 125180 ) on Wednesday July 09, 2003 @07:14AM (#6399296) Homepage
    Patent the business process of identifing an existing business practice, patenting it, and demanding royalties from companies using this business process. When such patent is granted, send a letter to them demanding a percentage of their litigation proceeds.
    • Patent the business process of identifing an existing business practice, patenting it, and demanding royalties from companies using this business process. When such patent is granted, send a letter to them demanding a percentage of their litigation proceeds.

      Dammit! I had the exact same idea last week, although I would shorten "existing business practice" to "existing practice". This would be a worthy activity for the FSF or better yet, the EFF It occured to me after the story about a company that announ

  • It looks like they were trying this on in the US in late 2000 - did they get anywhere?

    Seems unbelievable ...

  • Christ preached peace. He got crucified, and the Romans ruled for 500 years later, followed by 1500 years of European war mongers, followed by 100 years of American war mongers.

    Ghandi preached peace. Then, he got shot, and India and Pakistan spent 50 years at war.

    John Lennon said all he needed was love, then he married Yoko Ono, and got shot (don't know which is worse!)

    Really, the thing to do is to quit complaining about the powers that be and just lop off their heads. The French did it in 1789, why c
  • Pool, an American who moved DET [detechnologies.com] from Virginia last year when Canadians invested in the private firm, said DET is "entitled to a royalty on international transactions done computer to computer. [canada.com] Those New Zealanders are using our technology, for heaven's sake, and they're going to pay or they're going to stop violating the 505284 patent."

Slashdot Top Deals

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Close