Amazon Wins Trial Over Technology To Order Groceries With Alexa

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Amazon won a Texas trial in which it was accused of incorporating an Israeli company's patented "smart kitchen" inventions for voice commands to shop for groceries online into the Alexa digital assistant. Amazon didn't infringe three patents owned by closely held Ikan Holdings LLC's Freshub unit, the federal jury in Waco, Texas, said Tuesday. Freshub said its inventions allow consumers to create shopping lists, establish a shopping cart and order from their local grocer by using voice commands or scanning bar codes of products with an internet-connected device. Amazon knew of Freshub and its patents when it incorporated the technology into its Alexa assistant and Echo smart speakers, and promoted it for use with its Whole Foods grocery chain, Freshub claimed.

Amazon accused the company of manipulating patent applications to ensure they covered Alexa and Echo after the popular products had already entered the market. Amazon also warned jurors that a victory for Freshub would mean more lawsuits by the company against other tech firms like Apple and Google. Freshub argued consumers using the technology spent more money, so it was entitled to $3.50 per unit sold with the functionality, for a total of $246 million. Amazon argued that the patents were worth at most $1 million.

Its Like Online Shopping

[Luthair]

But with a voice or camera!

Quick, replace "with a computer" in your 90s patents with "with a camera" or "with verbal commands".

Re:

[PolygamousRanchKid]

But with a voice or camera!

I owe Freshub millions.

I've been using voice commands for ages to tell my girlfriend what to pick up at the supermarket.

Re:

[R3d M3rcury]

Ah, but is your girlfriend an internet connected device?

Re: Its Like Online Shopping

[reluctantmalelesbian]

How much is her subscription?

Re:

[teg]

Ah, but is your girlfriend an internet connected device?

Remove her Internet connection permanently and see if she still works?

Re:

[q_e_t]

We're internet-connected in that way. We use Trello for shopping lists and items can be added when one of us in the store. This was back when people went to stores, of course. And sometimes photos of products are additionally exchanged to guide decisions.

Re:

[jbengt]

I just don't understand how software can be a patent.

Patent law, in the USA, anyway, states that any person who “. . . invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent.

In the context of patent validity, courts have held that a process can include methods implemented by computers.

Business Process Patents Are Bullshit

[theshowmecanuck]

I wish there were evil things we could do to lawyers and the people who hire them who try to argue otherwise. And even worse for the judges that uphold them. They don't aid society, which is one of the things that patents are supposed to do, by law, and they don't aid competition or innovation. They are just pure bullshit.

Re:

[fermion]

This would mostly involve eliminating corrupt judges, not to mention indicted organized criminal Ken Paxton, who have been placed by equally corrupt conservative federal and local politicians. Patent trolls love Texas because a bribe can sway a court case with the business friendly community. I can only imagine that while Waco is of significant Jewish origins, the current population dislikes Jewish people more than Amazon

Oh, a trivial patent, not like One-Click Ordering

[zephvark]

It is seriously difficult to have any pity for Amazon getting screwed over by someone else's iffy patents, considering the risible garbage filed by Jeff Bozos.

A Value proposition.

[Ostracus]

Amazon argued that the patents were worth at most $1 million.

Meaning there was some legitimacy to them.

Re:A Value proposition.

[sconeu]

I suspect that the argument was "If said patents are valid (which we do not admit), and if we violated said patents (which we do not admit), then the most said patents are worth is ..."

Prior Art

[Macdude]

I'm sure if you go back to various Worlds Fairs in the 50's and 60's you can easily find prior art. This reminds me of all of the ridiculous patents that have been granted that take a long existing process and just add "on a computer" to it.

When PCs were first introduced you've have advertising trying to come up with reasons for people to have a home computer and "keeping your shopping list" was one of them, just being able to enter data via voice doesn't rise to the level of justifying patent protection.

Re:

[Angry Coward]

Generically entering data by voice doesn't deserve patent protection and in any sane world would be rejected by the patent office. A specific algorithm/machine to enter data by voice absolutely sounds like the kind of thing that might deserve a patent if its novel. I suspect this patent was more of the former than the later but I haven't read the actual patent.

Re:

[q_e_t]

It's only prior art if there was a way of actually implementing it at the time. There wasn't. It's like saying Jules Verne invented space travel.