Comments on: Netflix’s blatantly stupid patent suit against Blockbuster continues… http://blackhacker.net/articles/2006/08/24/netflixs-blatantly-stupid-patent-suit-against-blockbuster-continues/ A nerd even among geeks. Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:05:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8-bleeding-edge hourly 1 By: BH http://blackhacker.net/articles/2006/08/24/netflixs-blatantly-stupid-patent-suit-against-blockbuster-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-24258 BH Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:13:26 +0000 http://blackhacker.net/articles/2006/08/24/netflixs-blatantly-stupid-patent-suit-against-blockbuster-continues/#comment-24258 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. 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.

]]> By: Jon http://blackhacker.net/articles/2006/08/24/netflixs-blatantly-stupid-patent-suit-against-blockbuster-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-24181 Jon Sun, 27 Aug 2006 23:36:15 +0000 http://blackhacker.net/articles/2006/08/24/netflixs-blatantly-stupid-patent-suit-against-blockbuster-continues/#comment-24181 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. 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.

]]>