Amazon.com “one-click” Internet and software patent law Mike Foley Matt Landis Matt Clark Farman Syed

Background "The patent system added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius." - Abraham Lincoln (only U.S. President to be issued a patent) Patent debate not new U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8  Are we the first group to mention this? Patents originally unpopular Popular periods:  Industrial Revolution  1970’s+ (biotech)  1990’s+ (computers)

Software Patent History Patent requirements 1.Statutory 2.New 3.Useful 4.Non-obvious Software originally non-patentable  Mathematical formula (not statutory) 1990’s - Patent Office changes policy  Processes tied to “real-world” can be patented

Amazon.com and “1-Click” Amazon applies for “1-Click” patent  Purchasing process for repeat ordering without re-entry of personal information BN implements a similar process called “Express Lane” Amazon sues BN for infringement  “Express Lane” violates “1-Click” patent Settled out of court

Issues Prior Art  Burden of proof  Sufficient amount Obviousness Usefulness Ambiguity

Amazon.com’s perspective Insufficient prior art  Seattle court case  bountyquest.com Useful  BN  Apple

Amazon.com’s perspective Self-defense  BN Non-obvious method  Lockwood, Web Basket  Little prior art  Patent application in 1997 Need to support patent system  Encourages future patentees

Ethical Cons Amazon’s enforcement of their patent is hypocritical  Several free yet patentable products helped Amazon in early stages  CEO of Amazon calls for patent reform, yet won’t give up patent in question Patent enforcement is detrimental to technological innovation

Legal Issues Against Amazon Single “click” occurs after customer has decided to purchase a given item  Specifically, after locating an item’s page on the site Problem: Patent is based on the process user’s state of mind

Hypothetical Situations Customer 1: Goes to index page Finds an item of interest Reads item description, decides to purchase, clicks on “Buy” button Customer 2: Goes to index page Finds an item of interest Decides to purchase prior to reading description, goes to item page, clicks on “Buy” Customer 3: Knows what he wants to buy Finds link on index page Goes to item page, clicks “Buy” First click on Index doesn’t count… why? Customer 4: Goes to index page Finds an item of interest Reads item description, goes back to index, browses around, comes back to item page, decides to buy Only Customer 1 fits Amazon’s process paradigm  Key is at what point the “decision to buy” is made

Other Legal Issues Prior art may exist  Compuserve “Trend” system  “Web Basket” – 1996  Japan set to reject patent  Prior art: “User Interface Design” by Alan Cooper Patent may be obvious  Other technical professionals claim it is just “a rudimentary implementation of HTTP cookies”

Social Implications Setting of case precedence Empowering of large companies  Large legal teams for patent protection Public examination (online forums, etc.) Outcry from civil rights communities Satirical Responses

Future Patent regulations changing Increase in likelihood of software patents/business methods Continued scrutiny from developer groups Examination of possible patent infringements by businesses

Sources