Feeds

Patent-pimping pair attacks Apple, PayPal, Victoria's Secret

Amazon '1-Click' imbroglio redux

High performance access to file storage

Apple, PayPal, and Victoria's Secret have been slapped with a patent-infringement suit which alleges that their one-click online transaction-processing systems violate a 2004 patent held by a pair of companies that are no strangers to legal dust-ups.

The suit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Delaware – a state with favorable corporate laws – by Efficient Online Purchasing LLC and Cordance Corporation.

Efficient Online Purchasing appears to be a mere shell company: it shares the same Newport Beach, California, address as Acacia Research Corporation, a patent-management firm that describes itself as a "Leader in Patent Licensing" and which says on its website that its "subsidiaries partner with inventors and patent owners, license the patents to corporate users, and share the revenue."

According to paidContent.org, that sharing is "typically on a 50-50 basis."

Cordance, as the complaint notes, was formerly known as OneName Corporation, which, according to Bloomberg Businessweek, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2003. Cordance – whose News & Events web page hasn't been updated since mid-2006 – refers to itself as "the pioneering developer and provider of digital addressing technology".

This week's lawsuit isn't the first in Cordance's online transaction-processing patent-infringment follies.

A bit of background: Back at the end of the previous millennium, Amazon sued bookseller Barnes & Noble for patent infringement over its US Patent Number 6,269,369, which it claimed covered "1-Click" online transations. Although a US District Court quickly granted the online mega-retailer an injunction preventing others from using similar checkout tech, that injunction was overturned on appeal in early 2001. Just over a year later, Amazon and Barnes & Noble announced a settlement, though terms were not disclosed.

Amazon continued to defend its 1-Click patent, however, despite a 2006 patent infringement complaint against it from – wait for it – none other than Cordance Corporation. Four Cordance patents were in question at that time, including US Patent Number 6,757,710, the one in question in the just-filed suit against Apple, PayPal, and Victoria's Secret.

In August 2009, a Deleware jury ruled in Amazon's favor, dismissing Cordance's lawsuit – despite Amazon's patent being kicked in the teeth by a US court in 2007.

Cordance's 129-page patent – replete with 47 pages of patent diagrams, flowcharts, and screenshots – that is at the center of this week's complaint, and which was included in the company's 2006 complaint against Amazon, is entitled "Object-based on-line transaction infrastructure", and was granted to OneName Corporation in June 2004.

The core allegation of the lawsuit is the same 1-Click concept that was at the center of Cordance's tussle with Amazon. Specifically, the complaint alleges that "Apple has infringed, and continues to infring, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, the '710 patent, at least by implementing its iTunes purchasing platform," and that the alledged infringment is "knowing and willful."

The complaint also alleges the same infringement by PayPal for its "'Check-out with PayPal' purchasing platform", and Victoria's Secret for its "'1-step express checkout' functionality." Interestingly, the complaints against these two latter defendants don't include the "knowing and willful" clause – one that can triple damages if proven.

From the point of view of Efficient Online Purchasing and Cordance Corporation, Apple, PayPal, and Victoria's Secret's manner of storing customer information in such a way as to enable one-click – or 1-Click – checkout is protected by their patent, and they want a piece of the action.

If the court or a jury (the complaint "demands" a jury trial) goes the Amazon route, the entire exercise will be another futile one for Cordance. If, however, things go their way, or if an out-of-court settlement is reached, there may be a nice chunk of change for the two plaintiffs to split 50-50. ®

High performance access to file storage

More from The Register

next story
Audio fans, prepare yourself for the Second Coming ... of Blu-ray
High Fidelity Pure Audio – is this what your ears have been waiting for?
MtGox chief Karpelès refuses to come to US for g-men's grilling
Bitcoin baron says he needs another lawyer for FinCEN chat
Dropbox defends fantastically badly timed Condoleezza Rice appointment
'Nothing is going to change with Dr. Rice's appointment,' file sharer promises
Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?
And just when Brit banking org needs £400m to stay afloat
Zucker punched: Google gobbles Facebook-wooed Titan Aerospace
Up, up and away in my beautiful balloon flying broadband-bot
Apple DOMINATES the Valley, rakes in more profit than Google, HP, Intel, Cisco COMBINED
Cook & Co. also pay more taxes than those four worthies PLUS eBay and Oracle
It may be ILLEGAL to run Heartbleed health checks – IT lawyer
Do the right thing, earn up to 10 years in clink
France bans managers from contacting workers outside business hours
«Email? Mais non ... il est plus tard que six heures du soir!»
prev story

Whitepapers

Securing web applications made simple and scalable
In this whitepaper learn how automated security testing can provide a simple and scalable way to protect your web applications.
Five 3D headsets to be won!
We were so impressed by the Durovis Dive headset we’ve asked the company to give some away to Reg readers.
HP ArcSight ESM solution helps Finansbank
Based on their experience using HP ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager for IT security operations, Finansbank moved to HP ArcSight ESM for fraud management.
The benefits of software based PBX
Why you should break free from your proprietary PBX and how to leverage your existing server hardware.
Mobile application security study
Download this report to see the alarming realities regarding the sheer number of applications vulnerable to attack, as well as the most common and easily addressable vulnerability errors.