Webtrends Tracking Code
 
UK Home >  OUT-LAW News >  News Archive >  2000 >  November 2000 >  Business method patent prevails in US case

Business method patent prevails in US case

OUT-LAW News, 07/11/2000

A US federal appeals court has ruled in favour of a company that owns a business method patent that it claims covers the basic distribution of information over the internet. It is one of the first decisions by an appeals court on e-commerce business method patents.

In 1985, E-Data Corporation (also known as Interactive Gift Inc.) obtained a patent that lets companies sell directly to consumers at remote locations without having to stock warehouses full of products at those locations. E-Data claims that this patent also covers the basic process for selling software or documents on-line. On these grounds, it sued Comuserve, Broderbund Software, Waldenbooks and seven other companies for patent infringement and recovery of royalties. If ultimately successful, E-Data is expected to claim royalty payments from thousands of e-commerce web sites.

E-Data lost the first round of its case. A New York district court judge, Judge Barbara Jones, ruled that the company’s patent could not be extended to internet-based technologies. E-Data has now won its appeal before the federal court which said last week that Judge Jones interpreted the patent too narrowly. The appeals court ordered that she review the case again.

E-Data President, Scott Hillstrom said, “this case represents a strong victory for E-Data. While we didn't win every point, and some questions remain to be decided, E-Data's position in the digital product distribution marketplace is strengthened substantially.”

An E-Data statement added:

“The ruling construed the patent's claims in such a way that its application to virtually all US kiosk businesses selling digitally downloadable products (e.g. music, video games, books, etc.) is clear. The ruling also clarifies the issues that may now be addressed in further litigation relating to the sale of software, video games, music and other products downloaded by businesses and consumers to offices and homes.”

The appeals court limited the patent's effect by upholding Judge Jones' view that the patent does not cover downloads to PC hard drives. Further, Judge Jones has still to determine whether the patent was actually infringed. Even if she does find infringement, the defending companies could still argue that the patent is invalid on the grounds that the processes it covers were in use prior to the grant of the patent.

 

 

OUT-LAW Recommends

Data Protection training
We offer training courses on Data Protection and Freedom of Information laws

Winner at 2008 Webby Awards

OUT-LAW star: link to the home page
Disclaimer: This was printed from OUT-LAW.COM, a service of international law firm Pinsent Masons. We hope you find this content useful. However, please note that nothing in this document constitutes specific legal advice. You should consult a suitably qualified lawyer on any specific legal problem or matter. Any questions, please email info@out-law.com.