Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Patents Government News Politics

1-Click Smacked Down Again, While Reexam Languishes 72

theodp writes "Pressed on Amazon's 1-Click patent, then-USPTO Chief Q. Todd Dickinson got testy: "I make this challenge all the time. If you're aware of prior art out there that invalidates a patent that is existing, file a re-examination. We'll be happy to take a look at it." Really? It's been 3+ years since unemployed actor Peter Calveley submitted prior art that triggered a USPTO reexamination of the 1-Click patent. Still no 'final answer' from the USPTO. To put things in perspective, 1-Click inventor Jeff Bezos once proposed a three-year lifespan for patents (later retracted), let alone patent reexams. In the meantime, other patent examiners have repeatedly smacked down 1-Click — the latest (non-final) rejection was issued on Feb. 10th with Sandra Bullock's help."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

1-Click Smacked Down Again, While Reexam Languishes

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 21, 2009 @08:02PM (#26944899)

    I have an amazon account, they have all my details online, and so forth.

    But when I buy something through what they claim as "1 click", it sure seems like more than one to me.

    Is this some new definition of "1", or am I missing something obvious here? It takes several clicks just to get to the "you are about to be charged" screen. And that's assuming I have already logged in, which I usually haven't when I just want to go there and buy a CD or something.

    Well... maybe if I do all the navigation with the keyboard, it could be zero clicks, but I'm not sure that's what they mean.

  • by enter to exit ( 1049190 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @08:50PM (#26945213)

    let us say a car manufacturer invents a wireless device that unlocked your car when you are within a certain range automatically. let us also say they patented this

    technically, there are devices that sort of do this, except you have to press a button. Suddenly every car manufacturer realizes this is a much better method of opening doors and they decide to implement the same design in their cars.

    The original car manufacturer has spend time and money conducting usability studies, adding this, removing that in an effort to give their customers greater satisfaction.

    suddenly they see every car company has copied their design and have piggy-backed on the research they spent money on, on the grounds that there is already prior art (the button keys) and the idea is obvious anyway.

    Don't the inventors of the wireless door have the right stop and say "hey you guys didn't invent this, there was something similar but it's not the same thing, we spent money perfecting the things that in hindsight seem startlingly obvious, don't steal our work"?

  • by theodp ( 442580 ) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @11:12PM (#26945889)

    Ironically, Stephen Levy - whose 1995 article The End of Money [] is now being used by USPTO examiners to reject 1-Click patent claims as obvious - reported back in 2000's The Great Amazon Patent Debate [] about the conversation he sat in on in which Jeff Bezos just wouldn't hear that 1-Click was obvious. Responding to Tim O'Reilly's charge that "trying to enforce a patent claim on something as obvious as 1-Click is downright selfish," Bezos countered: "When we applied for the patent, 1-Click wasn't obvious...When we introduced it, people were surprised...They called it innovative."

Q: How many IBM CPU's does it take to execute a job? A: Four; three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.