Monday, April 28, 2008


I hate

The way I see it, every dollar I spend is a vote for this company or that company. If I don't like the way a company operates I don't vote for them.
I don't vote for Walmart because they actively send jobs to China. I don't mean that's an end result of their business practices. They tell the companies they buy from to move production to China.
I don't vote for because they make patenting things they didn't create and are in widespread use a standard business practice. Best known is their attempt to patent one-click ordering a decade or more back. They didn't create it and they didn't popularize it. It was the dawn of the internet so it wasn't terribly widespread. They did it to try to kill competition from Barnes and Noble and others. The founder and CEO of says it's immoral and should be illegal, but since it's not illegal he'll keep using it. So I take my business elsewhere.

That's why I'll never buy a Kindle. But I'm still impressed with the technology.

I've been watching the development of this electronic ink technology for years. A regular display uses power as long as it's on. But an electronic ink display only uses a burst of power when the display is changing. In the case of the Kindle it's when you "turn" the page but the suggested apps I usually see are on billboards and even paint for cars and buildings.

While I keep a few books on my PalmPilot the display suffers from glare when I try to read outside. That's the biggest advantage I see on the Kindle. There is no more glare than you'd get with a paper book.

I'm not gonna go on about the formatting of the documents or methods for downloading them or the services they provide or any of that. If you care that's available elsewhere. The only reason I'd get a Kindle is because I think the display is neat. But not neat enough for me to vote for I'm sure the tech will appear plenty of other places soon enough.


Anonymous said...

The 1-click patent is not a very good example of patenting something in wide spread use at the time of the invention. That patent has been the subject of scrutiny ever since it was issued and has stood the test of time. It is in reissue now, but the scope of the claims to be reissued are not likely to change much. That it is in wide-spread use now (not at the time of invention) is a testament to its innovation.

Amazon has been a pioneer in the Internet space and they have contributed quite a bit to innovation on the Internet.

Unlike many other companies with patent portfolios of its caliber, Amazon has shown much restraint in not proactively enforcing its portfolio.

Ibid said...

Spoken like an Amazon employee.

Amazon is not the only company that contributes to his horrible practice. But few companies that do this function in an area that influences me. The biggest offenders do nothing but patent things they don't invent or buy up existing patents and sue the crap out of others. Amazon I can boycott. Monster Cables I can boycott.

Amazon did not invent it and the number of websites using 1-click ordering at the time Amazon filed the patent could be counted on two hands.

Amazon has not shown restraint. They started filing lawsuits against Barnes and Noble and others almost immediately. The patent was challenged and Amazon's claim to the patent has been tied up in court almost constantly since then.

This is only the first of Amazon's many unwarranted patents. They now number in the dozens.