IBM Sues Amazon.com

[malware]

IBM announced on Monday that it hit Amazon.com with two lawsuits that seek unspecified damages. For four years, IBM attempted to clear up the matter before it decided to sue. IBM alleges that Amazon.com knowingly exploits its intellectual property by infringing on several patents that cover, among other things: the presentation of applications in an interactive service; the storage of data in an interactive network; the presentation of advertising in an interactive service; and the ordering of items from an electronic catalog. IBM filed the lawsuits separately in two district courts for the Eastern District of Texas, one in the Tyler Division and the other in the Lufkin Division. IBM first notified Amazon.com about the alleged infringement in September 2002, but Amazon.com hasn't wanted to engage in "meaningful discussions," IBM said.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Seany1212]

jesus all the companies arent half ripping off each other and there customers! IBM sue amazon, time warner sue youtube, transmeta trying to start on intel, PS3 sue lik-sang, then microsoft with vista (dont start!), then theres been alot of buying out. Its like a wrestling match with unlimited corners and a company to each of them. :shadedshu

 

[overcast]

he presentation of applications in an interactive service; the storage of data in an interactive network; the presentation of advertising in an interactive service; and the ordering of items from an electronic catalog.

What are they joking? How can you sue over things like this, these are processes, not technology. The ordering of items from an electronic catalog? So what is that EVERY single ecommerce site on the planet.

 

[Alec§taar]

What are they joking? How can you sue over things like this, these are processes, not technology. The ordering of items from an electronic catalog? So what is that EVERY single ecommerce site on the planet.

This is where "professional experts" in this field are brought in to testify to one another's opposing sides as to "WHY THEY ARE RIGHT & THEIR OPPONENT WRONG" etc., & magistrates + attorneys actually learn something about this field in the process & make decisions.



* I hope the 'computer dudes' make a PILE on it & charge by the hour, taking their time & being VERY detailed in their explanations of concepts &/or terms etc., of course...

JUST TO MAKE SURE that the legal eagles understand EVERY LITTLE BIT needed so the TRUTH comes out on who was right vs. who was wrong (& not by how much monies they can payoff folks involved with, etc.)...

All so those legal folks can understand this tech better than they do quite possibly, & so that this type of stuff hopefully, will cease... this "legalese" b.s. type of attack...

APK

P.S.=> It's how it is in this field because of legal eagles...

I've had it happen to me:

Microsoft wrote me a letter (actually their legal folks) & making me change the name of some programs I wrote, in the SHAREWARE/FREEWARE WORLD, no less... because I used the word "WINDOWS" in their names!

I was told to change it to "for Windows" instead, w/ a tm for MS in the name (which I did, not a big deal to me, I gave the wares away anyhow)...

Ah, lol, it makes you wonder!

Ms doesn't "OWN" the word WINDOWS, period... still, this is what those legal folks create! apk

 

[wazzledoozle]

I'm going to patent the internet.

I demand $50 from every website, payable now!

 

[b1lk1]

Let's drop a pile of lawyers in a pit and tape all these companies names to their forheads. The one that manages to crawl out alive first wins.

(no offense to lawyers personally, they should just take offense to what I state about what they do)

 

[overcast]

This is where "professional experts" in this field are brought in to testify to one another's opposing sides as to "WHY THEY ARE RIGHT & THEIR OPPONENT WRONG" etc., & magistrates + attorneys actually learn something about this field in the process & make decisions.



* I hope the 'computer dudes' make a PILE on it & charge by the hour, taking their time & being VERY detailed in their explanations of concepts &/or terms etc., of course...

JUST TO MAKE SURE that the legal eagles understand EVERY LITTLE BIT needed so the TRUTH comes out on who was right vs. who was wrong (& not by how much monies they can payoff folks involved with, etc.)...

All so those legal folks can understand this tech better than they do quite possibly, & so that this type of stuff hopefully, will cease... this "legalese" b.s. type of attack...

APK

P.S.=> It's how it is in this field because of legal eagles...

I've had it happen to me:

Microsoft wrote me a letter (actually their legal folks) & making me change the name of some programs I wrote, in the SHAREWARE/FREEWARE WORLD, no less... because I used the word "WINDOWS" in their names!

I was told to change it to "for Windows" instead, w/ a tm for MS in the name (which I did, not a big deal to me, I gave the wares away anyhow)...

Ah, lol, it makes you wonder!

Ms doesn't "OWN" the word WINDOWS, period... still, this is what those legal folks create! apk

Using a registered trademark name of company is not the same as suing someone over process. That's like saying I can sue over how to hammer a nail into a plank of wood. How else do you order items from an electronic catalog, without ordering items from an electronic catalog.

You'd think these companies would learn after the SCO fiasco. Now look at them, they are nothing.

 

[Alec§taar]

Using a registered trademark name of company is not the same as suing someone over process.

Oh, I realize this... but, I don't think anyone can say, "TM" the process of things really. Something may be LIKE something, but not be the same!

(Bad analog, but here tis: Aspirin & LSD - do you know HOW close they are chemically? Pretty close, radically diff. effects though!)

That's like saying I can sue over how to hammer a nail into a plank of wood. How else do you order items from an electronic catalog, without ordering items from an electronic catalog.

I agree - this is the point I was TRYING to make: Legal folks really 'screw things up' imo... over STUPID stuff!

You'd think these companies would learn after the SCO fiasco. Now look at them, they are nothing.

I agree!

Personally, I think I could have fought MS on that one I noted & dealt with, & won it...

See, I'm not exactly a stranger to this type of thing: E.G.-> In 1992, I beat a city/state government in a lawsuit, & everyone said I would lose... well, a trip to the bank later said otherwise, QUITE otherwise, lol!

In this case though? I was like "Why bother?'

I had "APK Windows" in my apps, MS did not like it & said make it "For Windows" instead. I went w/ it, no biggie. It was, after all just freeware anyhow!

Still - amazed me they approached me on it, but I didn't bother fight 'em on it. No gain possible for me.

Again: Does Microsoft OWN the word "WINDOWS"? No... far from it. It's been around FAR longer than Microsoft, period.

I was more "flabbergasted" @ the fact I support & 'champion/espouse' Windows as THE OS out here for years now... & they did that to me.

& it was a hassle redoing the source for it all, including resource files in the apps (the biggest pain to edit).

SysInternals? They went thru it w/ their FUNDELETE tool... they called it UNDELETE afaik first, & ExecSoft iirc, came after they as well: No biggie, they recompiled & re-released that tool of theirs.

This happens!

APK

P.S.=> Put it THIS way: I don't think it's coders doing this stuff, far from it... most of us just want to get paid for our time & knowledge, & build the BEST stuff we can... it's the folks that CAN'T do this, that hire us for our skillsets, that are the 'greedy ones'... but, they have their viewpoints too that you have to respect (like the fact they pay you etc. & the monies have to come from SOMEWHERE)... apk