Netflix’s blatantly stupid patent suit against Blockbuster continues…
BetaNews | Netflix Antitrust Case to Continue
Netflix’s apparent attempts to force Blockbuster out of the online rental market were stopped for the time being on Tuesday, as a federal judge ruled that Blockbuster would be allowed to proceed with its antitrust case against Netflix. The lawsuit was filed in response to a patent infringement suit filed by Netflix in April of this year.That case attempted to shut down Blockbuster Online through an injunction. Netflix claims Blockbuster infringes on two patents, one related to the automatic queue, and another that allows for the automatic receipt of new DVDs as well as reorganization of the queue.
I don’t think that I commented on this case before. But this is a an example of why patenting business methods should not be. Netflix basically has patented ‘the list’. It is saying that, “if you have a list of stuff that you can organize in any order you want. Than you have to pay us money.” I don’t see how this a novel idea. There should be a ‘blatantly stupid patent’ rule, such that if you submit a ‘blatantly stupid’ patent, you not only loose the patent but are bared from applying for a patent for say 5 years. During that time, you may only apply for a patent, with another party, a cosigner if you will who is not currently bared. The cosigner would also be at risk of being bared if this patent is also found to be ‘blatantly stupid’. Don’t get me wrong I LOVE Netflix. But this is NOT an invention.
August 27th, 2006 at 6:36 pm
There already is a clause in patent law that the obvious cannot be patented. You cannot be barred from filing patents, but the patent itself will be reject (as it should be). Blockbuster’s lawyers know this loophole and will use it as defense, if the case makes it to trial. The purpose of the countersuit is barganing leverage. By countersuing, if Netflix agrees to drop the patent infringement, Blockbuster drops the antitrust suit. Netflix keeps its fradulent patent for its duration, and Blockbuster gets a free lisence, and the two keep a merry duopoly pretending to compete.
Blockbuster should have come up with a more creative name though.
August 28th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Jon,
The concept of a list, or ‘Queue’, is not a new one. It has existed outside of the web for as long as we have had lists of things to do. The fact that they put it on the web is not an invention. And I know about the ‘obvious’ clause in the patent law. That has not kept other ‘blatantly stupid’ patents from being granted, like Amazon’s single click checkout. That is because the USPTO is under staffed for the amount of patent requests that it receives, so applications don’t get a fare evaluation. Basically, the public must police patents, pointing out that a patent is obvious, or examples or prior art.
Lastly, ‘obvious’ is a very subjective term. Just because something is not obvious to a lay person, doesnt mean it isn’t obvious to a software developer, like myself. Netflix’s Queue is obvious to me.