文章一開始就提出Soverain Software雖然網頁做得好像有那麼一回事，但卻實實在在是個Patent Troll，從沒有賣過一樣東西，甚至還做了一些調查。對這公司深惡痛絕的人還有它的被告，都是一些電子商物的零售商，因為Soverain Software擁有一些購物車專利，如US5,909,492、US7,272,639，以及US5,715,314。
如此，當NewEgg成功地撤銷了電子商務購物車的專利後，算是拯救了電子商務業者，一併解除相關專利訴訟。
NewEgg撤銷Soverain購物車專利（US5,715,314）的判決：
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/11-1009.pdf
系爭請求項Claim 34（代表項） of US 5,715,314：
34. A network-based sales system, comprising:
at least one buyer computer for operation by a user desiring to buy products;
at least one shopping cart computer; and
a shopping cart database connected to said shopping cart computer;
said buyer computer and said shopping cart computer being interconnected by a computer network;
said buyer computer being programmed to receive a plurality of requests from a user to add a plurality of respective products to a shopping cart in said shopping cart database, and, in response to said requests to add said products, to send a plurality of respective shopping cart messages to said shopping cart computer each of which comprises a product identifier identifying one of said plurality of products;
said shopping cart computer being programmed to receive said plurality of shopping cart messages, to modify said shopping cart in said shopping cart database to reflect said plurality of requests to add said plurality of products to said shopping cart, and to cause a payment message associated with said shopping cart to be created; and
said buyer computer being programmed to receive a request from said user to purchase said plurality of products added to said shopping cart and to cause said payment message to be activated to initiate a payment transaction for said plurality of products added to said shopping cart;
said shopping cart being a stored representation of a collection of products, said shopping cart database being a database of stored representations of collections of products, and said shopping cart computer being a computer that modifies said stored representations of collections of products in said database.
35. A network-based sales system in accordance with claim 34, wherein said shopping cart computer is programmed to cause said payment message to be created before said buyer computer causes said payment message to be activated.
這是一件有關網路銷售系統，系統有買家電腦、購物車電腦、購物車資料庫，系統讓買家可以透過網路與電腦選擇商品，並置入購物車（資料庫），購物車電腦接收到購物車資訊後，產生費用訊息，以執行交易。
在NewEgg上訴CAFC的專利無效請願中，經雙方辯論，Soverain並未提出有效證據（說明），也未針對先前技術CompuServe Mall提出回應。
314專利Claim 34被認為顯而易知，理由是先前技術CompuServe Mall揭示如claim 35的購物車付費技術，進而認為claims 34, 35顯而易知（引用KSR判例）。
CompuServe Mall於1980年代發表電子商務，有影片：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-oBJml1mL0，這成為現代電子商物的雛型。以下是CompuServe網站的介紹：
"An Internet Pioneer
Founded in 1969 as a computer time-sharing service, Columbus, Ohio-based CompuServe drove the initial emergence of the online service industry. In 1979, CompuServe became the first service to offer electronic mail capabilities and technical support to personal computer users. CompuServe broke new ground again in 1980 as the first online service to offer real-time chat online with its CB Simulator. By 1982, the company had formed its Network Services Division to provide wide-area networking capabilities to corporate clients.
CompuServe also led the interactive services industry overseas, entering the international arena in Japan in 1986 with Fujitsu and Nisso Iwai, developing a Japanese-language version of CompuServe called NIFTYSERVE. In 1989, the company expanded into Europe where it grew to be a leading Internet service provider."
還找到1988年新聞，標題是"On-line Shopping Is Open Anytime"：
http://articles.philly.com/1988-12-15/entertainment/26226456_1_electronic-mall-gift-shop-compuserve
my two cents:
電子商務類型專利很難准！
消滅真正Patent Troll最好的方式就是：訴訟持續到最後。如Lee Cheng受訪的講法："We saw that if we paid off this patent holder, we'd have to pay off every patent holder this same amount. This is the first case we took all the way to trial. And now, nobody has to pay Soverain jack squat for these patents."
不過，在此案中，Soverain是個不容小覷的Patent Troll，它能持續提告，持續用訴訟策略要被告低頭，而它只要求"一點點"和解費用...。（http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/04/shopping-cart-patent-troll-shamelessly-keeps-litigating-and-losing/）
NewEgg曾經遇到阻礙，為了捍衛「被告的權益」，要求原告繳付律師費，但是即便是"勝訴"，也不代表可以要敗訴方賠償律師費 - Site Update v. NewEgg (Fed. Cir. 2016)：http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2016/02/site-update-v-newegg-fed-cir-2016.html
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/patent-troll-realizes-it-sued-newegg-drops-lawsuit-the-next-day/
Ron
沒有留言:
張貼留言