Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Patents The Internet Your Rights Online

Amazon Patents Getting Numbers Off a Check 43

Posted by timothy from the rational-actor dept.
theodp writes "After two rejections, Amazon was granted a patent Tuesday for the Extraction of bank routing number from information entered by a user, which covers the process of obtaining a routing and checking account number from information entered by a user from the face of a check. The patent application was filed in the week preceding Amazon's Call for Patent Reform."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Patents Getting Numbers Off a Check More

Amazon Patents Getting Numbers Off a Check

Comments Filter:

  • Coming Soon... (Score:4, Funny)

    by shadwwulf ( 145057 ) on Tuesday July 06, 2004 @11:04PM (#9628661) Homepage
    a patent for the act of accepting money from customers...

    The idiocy continues...

  • What we need is... (Score:3, Funny)

    by lounger540 ( 730992 ) on Tuesday July 06, 2004 @11:04PM (#9628662)
    a patent for passing stupid patents. That'll show em.
  • I suppose the claim references the Internet, in which case this would probably be a moot point. IANAL and all that, but in the 1970s, I recall seeing in magazine inserts preprinted checks that could be used to donate to a charity (something like Save The Children, IIRC). You had to write the routing transit number and account information at the bottom, sign, and mail.

    • Re:Prior art from the stone age. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by base3 ( 539820 ) on Tuesday July 06, 2004 @11:15PM (#9628737)
      Not that it should be patentable, but that's not what the patent is about. What it describes is a means of guessing which 9 digits are the Federal Reserve RTN by seeing which are the first 9 consecutive digits to pass the check digit test.

      A means of doing the same thing without infringing on this patent (which should never have been granted) would be to check to see which 9 digits are in a list of all known RTNs. In case Amazon was going to patent that to, mark the time of this post as prior art.

      • Anyone want to co-author a patent with me on extracting the area code from a phone number? I'm sure it will take many years and millions of dollars of research so would be the perfect candidate for patent protection. If successful, next will be seperating the number from the street name in an address. Really tricky stuff.

      • mark the time of this post as prior art.

        Except that prior art must be shown to exist not less than one year before the patent is applied for.
        So if Amazon applies for a patent before 2005-07-06 (next year), your post can not be used as prior art.
        The one-year requirement leads to rediculous situations where some immoral person scours the literature and applies for patents based on what (s)he finds, then uses the granted patent to extract royalties from the original authors.

        • Learn something every day. Surely there's some safeguard that prevents the scenario you describe of people lifting research from journals and patenting it? Does a patent application not require the applicant to represent him/her/corporate self as an inventor?
          • Does a patent application not require the applicant to represent him/her/corporate self as an inventor?

            Co-invention is pretty common, radio, airplanes, etc. all were invented by different people within a few years without each others' knowledge.

            But you're quite right to ask the question - especially in the software field a year is plenty of time to lift an idea, implement it and file a patent application.

          • Surely there's some safeguard that prevents the scenario you describe of people lifting research from journals and patenting it?

            I don't know; I am not a patent lawyer.
            I just remember reading somewhere that a patent could not be applied for if the idea was published over a year before the application date, which implied to me that if the idea was published within a year, that publication could not be used as prior art.
            I remember thinking at the time that someone could read a publication and immediately app

  • grrrrr (Score:3, Interesting)

    by the quick brown fox ( 681969 ) on Tuesday July 06, 2004 @11:21PM (#9628768)
    These stupid patents just about piss me off enough that I'm ready to boycott Amazon... and if not for this one issue, they would be my favorite online retailer (well, aside from Newegg).

    From what I can tell, Bezos' statements can be summarized as "Don't hate the player, hate the game"--the same line that all the big players use--but it seems that AMZN in particular has gone far off the wrong end of the stupid-patent-o-meter way more than anyone else. (I have no actual data to back up this claim.)

    I have heard that IBM alone files 10 patent applications a day. And yet it's Amazon that is the poster child for frivilous patents. I like to think a responsible tech industry giant like Amazon should be able to amass a defensive patent arsenal without stooping as low as they have.

    • These stupid patents just about piss me off enough that I'm ready to boycott Amazon.

      I've been boycotting them ever since 1-click. Stupid fscking corporate mentality...

    • Re:grrrrr (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Moe Taxes ( 304424 )
      Amazon is not the bad guy. Bezos knows that software patents are out of control. He has asked for changes to this system because he knows the way it is going only companies with huge patent portfolios will be able to produce and use software. He can either play the evil game or watch his company be eaten alive by software patent holders. If you want to run a big successful company you are either filing software patents or you are failing in your responsibities. Don't blame Amazon, blame our bought and
      • Bezos knows that software patents are out of control. He has asked for changes to this system because he knows the way it is going only companies with huge patent portfolios will be able to produce and use software.

        My biggest question then is, why does he enforce these patents? Most corporations patent stupid things because it gives them leverage in a legal fire fight. They don't usually pursue someone who's using the technology unless they either want to preemptively take them out, or defend against an
        • My biggest question then is, why does he enforce these patents?

          Fiduciary responsibility. If Amazon can make a significant amount of money from licensing a patent and doesn't do it, then the shareholders have grounds for a lawsuit.

  • Is Amazon Evil.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Tuesday July 06, 2004 @11:52PM (#9628928) Homepage Journal
    ... or is the USPO just really stupid?

    I vote for the latter.

  • mouth hanging open... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 07, 2004 @01:43AM (#9629374)
    Man, I *seriously* need to start patenting all the shit I come up with. Not because I want to sue people, but because one of these days I'm going to *get* sued.

    I can't believe this is patentable. I do this stuff in my UI code all the time. It's a basic part of the "be liberal in what you accept" philosophy. Accept whatever is easiest for the user to type (or cut and paste), then pluck out what you need.

    Here's stuff I've done in programs, I'm sure anybody writing UI code has come up with this kind of stuff:

    * extract USA zip code from an address by searching for numbers backwards from the end and comparing result against the USPS database

    * extract dollar amounts from text by searching for numbers and dollar signs

    * extract email ID's from cut/pasted or forwarded emails by searching for headers: newline or start of string, string, colon before a double newline

    * extract eBay item numbers from emails based on length of digit string

    * extract URLs from emails based on heuristics (there is even a perl module to do this)

    Yeah, I've never had to code something to find check routing numbers, but damn, this would be the first thing I'd come up with! Tell me some identifiable property of the data, and I'll come up with a way to pluck it out. A couple regexes and a function to calculate the checksum or whatever it is.

    Cripes. This is no longer funny. All self-employed programmers, start patenting your shit!!!!

    I mean, your inventions!! I think Bezos has already patented defecation!!!

  • Well, HERE'S one patent they WON'T get . . . (Score:4, Funny)

    by nusratt ( 751548 ) on Wednesday July 07, 2004 @04:13AM (#9629783) Journal
    . . . because *i've* already filed for it:

    "A Novel Method Of Enhancing Consumer Privacy, By Preferentially Purchasing At Local Community Establishments, Using Uniquely Serialized Pieces Of Paper Currency Bearing Detailed Engraved Portraits Of Deceased National Leaders".

    Soon to be followed by:
    "A Method For Consumers To Alter Shopping Behavior, For The Purpose Of Undermining The Market-Strength Of Philosophically Objectionable Corporations".
    • . . . this comment as "Off-Topic":

      Gee, why do you suppose that timothy even published the original article on slashdot?

      Hint:
      "from the rational-actor-dept . . . The patent application was filed in the week preceding Amazon's Call for Patent Reform"

      For the powers-of-deduction-challenged modder:
      the article is of interest to the /. community because of their strong feelings about the patents issue, with some feeling that software patents are carried to absurdity.

      NOW do you see why the post isn't OT?
      It's cal
  • Let me get this straight:

    First, they acquire a new patent for getting people's checking account and routing numbers over the internet by having the {customer|user] enter them.

    Then, they launch a call for "Patent Reform".

    I'm assuming their version of patent reform would be "Everyone else has to give up their bad patents, but we get to keep them."

    • I'm assuming their version of patent reform would be "Everyone else has to give up their bad patents, but we get to keep them."

      Maybe, maybe not. Bezos' comment does sorta imply that he understands the idiocy of the situation but is trying to "fight it within the system" by forcing it to an absurd extreme. There is precedent for this approach.

      OTOH, it's entirely possible that his understanding is that absurdities like this will have the effect of eliminating all those pesky little competitors, while lea

  • Do it first (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by KilobyteKnight ( 91023 )
    It certainly sounds ridiculous on the face of it. But, in this current system, it'd be foolish for a company to not try and patent everything they can, even if they have no intention of enforcing it, before the competition does.

    Then if you've accidentally infringed on someone else's silly patent, you can trade rights instead of having to cough up money.

    IMNSHO, software patents should be eliminated entirely, and copyrights should only cover published works (i.e. source - you know, like books for which cop
    • IMNSHO, software patents should be eliminated entirely, and copyrights should only cover published works (i.e. source - you know, like books for which copyrights were origionally intended). What's left is trade secrets.

      This is not necessarily a software patent. It's a process patent. In theory, they could stop you from performing the same process whether you're using a keyboard or doing it by hand.

      • This is not necessarily a software patent. It's a process patent. In theory, they could stop you from performing the same process whether you're using a keyboard or doing it by hand.

        I'd be willing to go as far as saying there shouldn't be process patents. Patents were intended to give innovators a limited monopoly for innovations. The purpose being to encourage research. Processes need no such artificial support. Businesses will create processes that improve their margin automatically without such go

  • March 2 2000? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Jahf ( 21968 )
    Ok, so they filed for the patent on 2 March 2000 ... how far back were they actually using the method?

    I ask because I -swear- that in the mid-90's I was able to use the exact same information to register an account on AOL. Perhaps AOL didn't use the information for -electronic- withdrawal but just printed checks using the info. If so, then ok, there are some differences but seriously not enough to make this valid.

  • hate the game, not the player (Score:3, Insightful)

    by voisine ( 153062 ) on Wednesday July 07, 2004 @11:33AM (#9632417)
    I agree with Bezos' statements the effect of "hate the game, not the player". The patent system is a legal construct that happens to be broken. By exploiting it legally, you eventually force our inept legislature to do something to fix it. Similar to the tort reform problem, or MS security holes. If it gets exploited enough, eventaully even our elected officials won't be able to ignore it. Amazon has shown they wouldn't be adverse to a fix with their recent initiative for patent reform.
    • Actually, to be completely unbiased about it, you should hate the game AND the player...

      Hate the game (the patent system) because of the anarchistic mechanisms that it attempts to use to protect people's ideas.

      Hate the players for abusing the patent system.
  • Maybe I should just patent a process for feeding instructions to a cpu from RAM to obtain an intended result (computer program) and solve the whole problem. Every time anyone anywhere turns on a computer, I'll get royalties. :)

    This software patent crap is absolutely idiotic!

    I shouldn't be so facetious. It is coming to that. That day will arrive and soon. It is surprising that someone hasn't thought of this and tried it already.
  • In other words, they were shopping for a patent examiner who wasn't watching what his rubber stamp was hitting???
    • In other words, they were shopping for a patent examiner who wasn't watching what his rubber stamp was hitting???
      Actually, it was probably the same examiner who issed the two rejections and then allowed the patent.
      99% of claims in patent applications are initally rejected. I would say %80 of all patent application have two seperate rejections, and its not uncommon to see up to six rejections, over the course of two or three years, for a single application. Basically, what happens is a patent applicatio
  • I hate to always harp on this, but every day the /. editors find a granted patent with a title of XYZ, and say that the patent covers XYZ. It is sad to see people with so much knowledge making basic logical errors when it comes to patents.

    In law, the patent title has no effect on the scope of a patent. Instead, the scope of a patent is determined by its claims (read in light of the specification).

    In this case, the title of Amazon's patent is "Extraction of bank routing number from information entered

  • I found prior art! (Score:4, Funny)

    by raider_red ( 156642 ) on Friday July 09, 2004 @01:55PM (#9654223) Journal
    I think I found a prior art that can be used against enforcement of this patent. Text below:

    Hello,

    Please allow me to introduce my self. I am Natanba Colunga, and my husband was until recently the president of the Central African Republic... ...Please send your account number and routing number to this email address, and the money will be wired in tomorrow.

Slashdot Top Deals

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Close