Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GB2339941B]

This may sound like a crazy question when I own patent GB2339941B, independently valued at between £17.5 - £22 million. The patent is for the UK only and covers all online price comparison websites.  Sites where you compare the best price for a product (car insurance, holidays, white goods, etc, etc ….).  The patent also covers one click links to other websites and pre-dates the Amazon patent (Barnes and Nobel could use it to get their money back).
The patent was granted in 2001, but as one of the little guys, with no money, I can’t take the 1000’s of infringers to court. The patent might be worth millions on paper, but it’s worthless to me.
What should I do?

[bald & chained]

Is there such a thing as contingency fee litigation in UK?

[Robert K S]

I recommend you post to internet message boards as a way of advertising your patent for licensing or sale, and drum up interest and/or sympathy by making extravagant assertions about what the patent's claims cover.  Maybe you can point out exactly how they cover price comparison and one-click.

CLAIMS: 1. A networked computer trading system comprising a central server station comprising:
means for receiving and transmitting data to and from a plurality of user stations and a data storage system; and
a plurality of user stations arranged to receive and transmit data to and from said central server station,
characterised by said system having stored therein a main input interface for inputting a selection of a type of commodity to be traded and a plurality of commodity interfaces for inputting product details of specific commodities, wherein each of said plurality of commodity interfaces is arranged to enable the input of data relating to a respective different one of a plurality of commodities,
said system further comprising:
means for transmitting, in response to a request received from a said user station, said main input interface; and
means for transmitting one of said commodity interface, in response to a request received from a said user station using said main input interface.

2. A central server station for use in a networked computer trading system comprising:
means for receiving and transmitting data to and from a plurality of user stations; and
a data storage system;
characterised by:
said data storage system having stored therein a main input interface for inputting a selection of a type of commodity to be traded and a plurality of commodity interfaces for inputting product details of specific commodities, wherein each of said plurality of commodity interfaces is arranged to enable the input of data relating to a respective different one of a plurality of commodities;
means for transmitting, in response to a request received from a said user station, said main input interface; and
means for transmitting one of said commodity interfaces, in response to a request received from a said user station using said main input interface.

3. A system in accordance with claim 1 or 2, wherein said data storage system is arranged to store a database of commodities, each of said plurality of commodity interfaces defines a respective different input interface for inputting a query to interrogate said database, and said means for receiving and transmitting data is arranged to transmit to a user station data based on the results of an interrogation of said database.

4. A system in accordance with claim 3, wherein said data storage system has stored therein a database of commodities.

5. A system in accordance with claim 3 or 4, wherein said database comprises a plurality of databases, each arranged to contain records relating to a respective different one of said plurality of commodities which can be selected using the main interface, wherein each of said plurality of commodity interfaces defines a specific input interface for interrogating a respective different one of said plurality of databases.

[Robert K S]

6. A system in accordance with claim 3, 4 or 5, wherein said data storage system has stored therein a plurality of output formats for outputting the results of an interrogation of said database, and said apparatus further comprises means for supplying output data to a user station using one of said plurality of output templates and the results of interrogating said database.

7. A system in accordance with claim 6, wherein said data storage system has stored therein linking data representative of instructions for linking a user station to a second user station, wherein said means for supplying output data is arranged to incorporate said linking data in said output data in accordance with the results of an interrogation of said database.

8. A system in accordance with any of claims 3-7, further comprising means for recording the number of times individual records are retrieved from said database.

9. A system according to claim 8, wherein said database includes data representative of the value of products stored therein, wherein said means for recording a number of times entries are retrieved from said database is arranged to record the accumulative value of the records retrieved.

10. A system in accordance with claim 8 or 9, further comprising output means for outputting said recorded data.

11. A system in accordance with any of claims 3-10, wherein said means for receiving and transmitting data to and from a plurality of user stations is arranged to receive data representative of records which are to be stored in said database.

12. A system according to any of claims 3-11, further comprising input means for inputting data for storage in said database.

13. A network computer trading system comprising a central server station in accordance with any of claims 2-12 when dependent directly or indirectly upon claim 2 and a plurality of user stations, wherein said plurality of user stations are arranged to receive and transmit data to and from said central server station.

14. A central server station for use in a networked computer trading system comprising:
means for receiving and transmitting data to and from a plurality of user stations; and
a data storage system;
characterised in that:
said data storage system has stored therein a main input interface template defining an interface for selecting a type of commodity to be traded and a plurality of commodity interface templates each defining an input interface for inputting product details of specific commodities, wherein each of said plurality of commodity interface templates is arranged to enable input of data relating to a respective different one of the plurality of commodities which can be selected using the main interface defined by the main interface template.

15. A storage medium having stored therein instructions for generating in a computer a main input interface template defining an interface for selecting a type of commodity to be traded and a plurality of commodity interface templates each defining an input interface for inputting product details of specific commodities, wherein each of said plurality of commodity interface templates is arranged to enable input of data relating to a respective different one of the plurality of commodities which can be selected using the main interface defined by the main interface template.

[GB2339941B]

Thanks for posting the claims Robert.

The claims are for comparing a multiple of products and arranging them in price order, or any order they choose, so the prospective purchasers can make the best choice.

The claim for one click is simply that, once a choice is made they can either buy on the site or in one click be taken to the site of the seller. The prior art date is April 1997, so predates Amazon by some months.

[bald & chained]

The claims are for comparing a multiple of products and arranging them in price order, or any order they choose, so the prospective purchasers can make the best choice.

I am a little confused - where's that feature in the claims?

[dablueman]

The claim for one click is simply that, once a choice is made they can either buy on the site or in one click be taken to the site of the seller. The prior art date is April 1997, so predates Amazon by some months.

Sorry to tell you my friend but I don't think you have what you think you have. I don't see a claim or claims that even teaches toward Amazon's one click. It looks like a electronic commodity trading system to me, similar to the ones in place in most commodity exchanges (like the Chicago merchintile exchange) since the early 80s.

[GB2339941B]

Dablueman, you are partially correct in that the patent is an improvement on previous trading technology. I am not going to bore people by posting the patent in full, but the one click claim is a minor section in the comparative patent and merely an added bonus.
 7. A system in accordance with claim 6, wherein said data storage system has stored therein linking data representative of instructions for linking a user station to a second user station, wherein said means for supplying output data is arranged to incorporate said linking data in said output data in accordance with the results of an interrogation of said database.

[dablueman]

Dablueman, you are partially correct in that the patent is an improvement on previous trading technology. I am not going to bore people by posting the patent in full, but the one click claim is a minor section in the comparative patent and merely an added bonus.
 7. A system in accordance with claim 6, wherein said data storage system has stored therein linking data representative of instructions for linking a user station to a second user station, wherein said means for supplying output data is arranged to incorporate said linking data in said output data in accordance with the results of an interrogation of said database.

I'm still not sure where you're getting one click from GB2339941 so can you specifically point out for me where the one click purchasing from a single company (amazon.com) is in claim 7? Where is the user purchasing from a single supplier without entering their billing or quantity information and purchasing with only one click?

I read your patent in full and still don't see it. It still appears to be a trading system for purchasing commodities (corn, orange juice, insurance) by getting quotes from multiple suppliers and then picking the cheapest quote requiring the entry of purchasing data and multiple clicks.

[InventorA.]

Dear Newbie...

Seems we Inventors never actually invent anything "new or novel"...
Its ALWAYS some rich corporation, or the dozens of infringers (that come later).
We are charged tens of thousands of dollars to fully disclose our inventions, but
never is OUR patent ever worth the paper its printed on... & the USPTO keeps
charging us "Maintainence Fees" on our worthless wall hanging but its never, ever
worth a dime to us. WE supply the "bluprint" for the droves of infringers to follow,
and we do so at our own expense... Nice System they all got going here, isn't it?
Oh & that patent number issued by our USPTofO, oh, that was just all a mistake!
Here's an "objective opinion" these good-ole-boys, well, ...they just ain't gon'na like! 

http://corruptionbusters.blogspot.com/    (and this ain't no spam, brother)

Newbie, feel free to say whatever you feel, right about now
'cause that's one RIGHT can't nobody take!

The TRUTH HURTS - don't it boys?
(ya'all come back now... ya'heaar?)

a fellow ripped-off [but Pioneering] inventor,
(in much the same boat!)



OK boyz... let the rock-throwing begin!!! )))))

[JimIvey]

Patents are often essential but almost never sufficient.  As far as I know, it's always been that way.  A lot of people who are new to patents seem to believe that the system is designed to automatically funnel money to inventors who have patents.  It's never been that way and I don't expect that it ever will be that way.

Patents give you rights, rights that you must use a court to enforce -- just like any other property right. 

That's the way it is, and that's the way it's always been.  Maybe it shouldn't be that way.  That may be an interesting debate to have.  However, to suggest that it's some sort of "ripoff" or that people are getting screwed is just plain wrong.  You hear those claims from people who have just discovered that they have been ignorant as to the nature of patents.

Regards.

[UVAgal4]

We get start-up companies who base all their hopes and dreams on one patent application and have to break it to them (sometimes, not so gently) that one (or many) resulting patent isn't the be-all and end-all that will catapult their company into billions of earnings.

[InventorA.]

Dear Newbie...

Seems we Inventors never actually invent anything "new or novel"...
Its ALWAYS some rich corporation, or the dozens of infringers (that come later).
We are charged tens of thousands of dollars to fully disclose our inventions, but
never is OUR patent ever worth the paper its printed on... & the USPTO keeps
charging us "Maintainence Fees" on our worthless wall hanging but its never, ever
worth a dime to us. WE supply the "bluprint" for the droves of infringers to follow,
and we do so at our own expense... Nice System they all got going here, isn't it?
Oh & that patent number issued by our USPTofO, oh, that was just all a mistake!
Here's an "objective opinion" these good-ole-boys, well, ...they just ain't gon'na like! 

http://corruptionbusters.blogspot.com/    (and this ain't no spam, brother)

Newbie, feel free to say whatever you feel, right about now
'cause that's one RIGHT can't nobody take!

The TRUTH HURTS - don't it boys?
(ya'all come back now... ya'heaar?)

a fellow ripped-off [but Pioneering] inventor,
(in much the same boat!)



OK boyz... let the rock-throwing begin!!! )))))

I’m not exactly sure why…
the topic “HOW DOES A SMALL ENTITY FIND REPRESENTATION?”
was removed - but whatever the reason…  I can think of a hundred more, why
it should remain in public view, (both) on this legal forum., as well as in others.
So, since a copy of everyone’s expressed comments had been retained & resent
to me, by popular demand  it is being reposted by yours truly, since the original
question it posed had never been properly addressed by the legal world anyway.
I still feel that regardless of who asked the question - we still need that answer!
Please Note; that a post or two may have been removed by the moderator, (for
other internal reasons beyond our control which will not re-appear herein, but for
the most part, the discussion is complete (except for our illusive answer that is). 

OK... I have been informed by PM, (from the individual inventor who started the string
mentioned immediately above) that the string was not removed by the Moderators,
but rather he was told that in order to remove a couple of statments, he'd have to
remove the entire topic which he did, as he was advised that that was in his best interests.
However, he also felt that the majority stated therein was very important, and therefore urged
me that it should be reposted if possible... in order (for we inventors) to gain a realistic answer.
Therefore, with some outside help I was able to reconstruct the majority of the string.

The question was:  “HOW DOES A SMALL ENTITY FIND REPRESENTATION?”
A link, to the detailed discussion which immediately followed will be reposted again, soon.
It should be noted however, that after all of this "discussion..." NO ANSWER HAS BEEN FOUND.
(a lot less talk, & a little more action would be nice)

So, I guess (in the final analysis) the short answer is.... THEY - DON'T !!! & THEY'RE NOT!

[JustAnotherExaminer]

I'm glad this is a GB patent, so I can unofficially comment on it.  Phew.

Sorry, but that patent should never have been issued.  Querying databases in a client/server architecture, really?

[JimIvey]

We get start-up companies who base all their hopes and dreams on one patent application and have to break it to them (sometimes, not so gently) that one (or many) resulting patent isn't the be-all and end-all that will catapult their company into billions of earnings.

Well, at least startups are trying to do more than just get a patent or patents.  By trying to actually bring the technology to market, they're working to build perceived value into their technology and their patent(s).  An inventor who merely declares the existence of their invention and gets a patent on it really isn't doing much to build value into their property.  Patents are almost never sufficient.  They are, however, often essential (for business ventures basing a business on some new technology).

Having said all that, it's still risky business, even for startups trying to do things the right way (the way with best odds of success).

Regards.