decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Sorry for my lack of insight, | 179 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The Magic Still Works
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 18 2013 @ 02:23 PM EDT
i.e. the technology that is sufficiently advanced to be indistinguishable
from magic. It doesn't have to be very advanced if the bench still
believes in the tooth fairy. But this is more advanced than the old saw
of doing whatever it was "on a computer". Now we are doing it
"via an internet web site." Powerful stuff that Buckleys.

I'm having trouble seeing how "far removed from purely mental steps"
is my clicking on a [Buy] button. Maybe it's true that none of those
judges has ever used Amazon, or iTunes, or ...

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Sorry for my lack of insight,
Authored by: albert on Monday, March 18 2013 @ 06:26 PM EDT
but what am I missing here? This appears to be a business method patent.
AFAICT, the 'unique' claim appears to allow a user to view some otherwise
restricted media in exchange for viewing advertising (5). The other claims
appear to be prior art.

If this is a fair characterization, then where's the rubber?

Seriously, are there _any_ examples of non-bogus business method patents?

I am afraid to show this example to anyone, for fear of being considered totally
insane for taking this stuff so seriously.

OK....I'm considered a little nuts already.....but, c'mon!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )