[Patents] consultation questions

[phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)]

> > > I know that the Amazon 1-Click patent is obvious.
> > May be. I'm not involved in this case, and I can't give you peremptorily 
> > an
> > serious opinion. You can't just proclaim "AMAZON's patent claim 1" is non
> > obvious. In fact, did you ever :
> > 1 - Read the claims of Amazon patent ?
> > 2 - Identify prior art document
> > 3 - Structure a demonstration of nullity of amazon's claims based on this
> > prior art ?
>
> I have read the claims, and they are indeed obvious to anyone
> moderately experienced in Web programming.  Looking for prior art and
> demostrating nullity is an exercise for lawyers.  The patent simply
> contains nothing interesting or surprising to a programmer.
>
> Admit that there are bad patents, and I'll admit that there are better
> ones than Amazon's.

I think that neither the Amazon One-Click patent nor the BT hyperlink
patent are particularly obvious or bad, both according to the normal
standards of the patent system, as Mr. Breese explained them, and
according to the feeling of programmers.  Maybe you haven't read enough
european patent claims yet.  You could try to

        http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/pikta/txt/

and get a bath in European patents.  But we aware that you might feel
afterwards as if you had drunk a pool full of waste water from your
kitchen sink.

-phm