Re: Amazon Patents Getting Numbers Off a Check

[Christopher C. Stacy]

>>>>> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 20:28:03 -0500, Isaac  ("Isaac") writes:

 Isaac> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:09:20 -0700, AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu> 
wrote:
 >> In article <JKGdnYDhU43AaJ3cRVn-og@giganews.com>,
 >> "I approved this message" <nospam@email.gov> wrote:
 >> 
 >>> The problem with business method patents is that USPTO isn't so good at
 >>> searching the prior art in these fields.
 >> 
 >> The problem is, and continues to be, that it's way, way too cheap and 
 >> easy for an applicant (often jocularly referred to as an "inventor") to 
 >> get an undeserved and invalid patent, with little or no subsequent 
 >> downside for his/her having done so.
 >> 
 >> 
 >>> If you think the patent is invalid, why don't you challenge it?
 >> 
 >> Maybe because the system makes it inordinately difficult and expensive 
 >> to do so, with a highly uncertain outcome -- and maybe because the OP 
 >> simply doesn't have the deep pockets required to even initiate, much 
 >> less seriously pursue, a challenge.

 Isaac> Or alternatively because he has no real interest other than
 Isaac> academic and would not spend the money challenging the patent
 Isaac> even if he had it.

He might have an interest in the potential liability and marketability of
an invention that he might be contemplating, translating to a decision of
whether to make a major investment of personal time and resources.
It would be terrible for to suppose that all inventions must be initiated
by only the very few mega-corporations.