Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

eBay in 'Buy It Now' Patent Dispute 292

smooth wombat writes "The Office of the Solicitor General of the United States has filed a brief with the Supreme Court, taking the side of MercExchange who is in a patent dispute with eBay over eBays Buy It Now feature. Two lower courts have already upheld MercExchange's patents including finding that eBay had willfully infringed on the Buy It Now patent. Later this month the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments. The Office of Solicitor General is arguing eBay should be barred from using Buy It Now due to the decision of two lower courts that upheld MercExchange's patents. eBay is arguing that infringements should not automatically result in injunctions and shutdowns."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

eBay in 'Buy It Now' Patent Dispute

Comments Filter:
  • by Gallenod ( 84385 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @12:49PM (#14908432)
    I can see patenting a cash register. That's technology someone had to develop and produce. But isn't claiming a patent on "buy it now" a bit like patenting the use of a cash register instead of the register itself?

    If you can "patent" a method of doing business, isn't the first company to ever use a cash register entitled to receive business method patent royalties from all the copycats who started using them later?
  • Re:The Details (Score:4, Interesting)

    by KarmaMB84 ( 743001 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @12:51PM (#14908451)
    The patent seems rather focused on e-commerce and on there being both an auction (best offer) and a "direct buy" (buy it now) price. Retail outlets online or otherwise generally aren't auctioning items so their price is just that: a price. Since there's no auction price or otherwise, then this "direct buy" price wouldn't infringe. The killer for eBay is that they actually negotiated with the patent holder; therefore, they knew about it and are infringing willfully.
  • Re:The Details (Score:4, Interesting)

    by terrymr ( 316118 ) <terrymr@@@gmail...com> on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:00PM (#14908525)
    You're free to offer any amount you like to buy something in a store, most store staff will look at you funny, but who hasn't tried to haggle for a free something when buying a high $ item.

    The price on the tag could be considered the "buy it now" price at which the store owner has already indicated they'd sell.
  • by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:11PM (#14908633) Journal
    While I know there are many on here who will say that these patents are bogus, eBay screwed up both by violating someones patent as well using the Buy It Now feature.

    The article clearly states that eBay was in negotations to license this patent but negotiations broke off. eBay then went ahead, knowing that someone else held the patent to this service, and instituted Buy It Now anyway.

    Further, Buy It Now is becoming the norm rather than the exception. When eBay started they were an online auction company. People put up stuff to sell and let the market determine the price.

    Now, Buy It Now is overtaking the auction feature and dealers are holding sway. For example, I'm looking to add to my camera equipment. When I do a search for my particular type of lenses I get 11 pages back. Of those pages at least half are Buy It Now from dealers.

    Do a search for lens accessories and 3/4 of the pages are from dealers. Camera cases? 90% of the listings are from dealers using Buy It Now.

    I was fortunate enough to pick up a lens last weekend. I took a look at the bid history and checked the last person to bid (2 seconds before the auction closed). Sure enough they were a dealer and everything the person had for sale on their site was Buy It Now.

    This is alot like flea markets nowadays. In the past the people selling stuff were like you and I. Now when you go there are dealers galore.

    I'm not against the market system, that's what eBay was originally founded on. However, by allowing people, particularly dealers, to set a specific price, defeats the whole purpose of an auction.

    Yeah, yeah, I know. If you don't like it, don't buy from the dealers. I don't. The point is that when dealers control the vast majority of the listings that will drive the price up for everyone else since there will be fewer true auction listings for people to choose from.

    Personally I can't wait to see Buy It Now be done away with.
  • by Blazeix ( 924805 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:13PM (#14908660) Homepage Journal
    Would it be possible to avoid ths entire dispute by having a button that had a programmed time delay of around 2 seconds? It would essentially be a "Buy it now" button, but it wouldn't be conflicting with other companies!
  • Re:erm ... shops (Score:2, Interesting)

    by the bluebrain ( 443451 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:15PM (#14908690)
    I was thinking more of sociology 404. The stigma of the criminal seems to have morphed into the aura of the outlaw, sometime during the last century. Even more so if what you have done is not criminal, but merely criminally immoral. Seems that as long as you've got the moolah, you are, by definition, "good", and no doors are closed to you.
  • Re:"critical mass" (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Billosaur ( 927319 ) * <<wgrother> <at> <optonline.net>> on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:29PM (#14908809) Journal
    The more patents and patent snits like this, the better. Only when the system reaches "critical mass" will it implode.

    Hate to tell you, but this is alreay at critical mass. Look at the number of big-time patent fights that are going on now:

    The list continues to grow. Somewhere, someone is writing code in the warm little cocoon of ignorance and once they have released it into the wild, they will be set upon by flocks of hungry vultures^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hlawyers and will eventually be sued into backruptcy and destitution. Ah, it's a great time to be a programmer!

  • by Scarletdown ( 886459 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:31PM (#14908820) Journal
    I don't know if the auction is capped at the fixed price though. I'd assume so.


    No. The auction is not capped at the BIN price. Once a bid has been placed (provided the reserve price, if there is a reserve has been met or exceeded), the Buy It Now option goes away, and the item goes to the regular auction format with no upper limits.

    I myself have been pleasantly surprised the few times I have had items end up going for higher than what the Buy It Now was. And in a few instances, I have been amused to discover that the winning bidder in those instances ended up being the one who initially bid and popped the Buy It Now, paying more in the end than what he would have paid had he just made the purchase with BIN.
  • by bogie ( 31020 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @01:37PM (#14908884) Journal
    Yesterday my wife was telling me that she was talking with a group of people recently and they were all talking about things they have thought about inventing when they were younger. And also they commented how some of those ideas were actually turned into products. I told her they should have all filed patents. She said "Well you can't do that because you have to actually make a product. You can't just patent an idea or an idea about a method of doing something." I just smiled.

    The average person has no idea fucked up the patent situation is in this country.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 13, 2006 @02:09PM (#14909186)
    IAMANAL, but isn't there a law or principle that, if a second set of inventors with no likely or remotely possible link to or knowledge of the previous patended invention makes a similar invention, they can also make use of it?

    I seem to remember a case where company Y considered patented method A so vital that it screened engineers/programmers (I believe the latter) for those who had never heard of method A, and then employed them, without any guidance how, to solve the problem, and in doing so they came up with method A? Which was subsequently allowed?

    If this is the case - isn't it just a matter of scraping together a focus group of punters from somewhere who have never used Ebay, and ask them to design a feature-rich online auction system?
  • by jocknerd ( 29758 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @02:21PM (#14909276)
    Change the "Buy it now" to "Buy it in 5 minutes"

    These patents are just so f'ing stupid.
  • Now, Buy It Now is overtaking the auction feature and dealers are holding sway.

    Speaking as an eBay seller, it seems that eBay wants it to be this way -- at least for small items -- and I'm not happy. I, for one, would prefer to use the classic bid option to sell my photographs [ebay.co.uk] but with the way eBay nickel and dimes you to death, it's just too costly by the time I'm done with gallerly fees, category fees, initial price fees, final price fees and paypal fees. I'm hoping the ebay killer comes along soon so I can switch ships.

    -CGP
  • Patent Requirements (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bmh129 ( 928163 ) on Monday March 13, 2006 @04:11PM (#14910273)

    This patent is obviously invalid. It falls into two categories which violate major rules of patentability:

    -Nonstatutory (method of doing business)

    -Obvious (does not take an inventor to "buy it now" at a predetermined price)

    Yet somehow, they have a patent, they've managed to fight a long court battle over it, and apparently, the government educated morons running the Solicitor General's office think it's valid!

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Working...