Its a good thing they've won that law suit,  at some point in time
Amazon's got to start making a real profit.  Perhaps they'll get out of
the red by collecting royalties from all the other e-commerce web
sites....

Wirt Atmar wrote:
>
> Tom asks:
>
> > Can you say what case it was that Amazon won?
>
> The following is from the December 3rd issue of the New York Times:
>
> =======================================
>
> December 3, 1999
>
> Amazon Wins Court Ruling in Patent Case
>
> By SAUL HANSELL
>
> Signaling that many common features on Web sites can be patented, a federal
> judge has ordered Barnesandnoble.com to stop using a "one click ordering"
> system that Amazon.com patented.
>
> Judge Marsha J. Pechman of Federal District Court in Seattle issued a
> preliminary injunction late Wednesday in a case filed in October by Amazon,
> the online store that pioneered many now-common techniques for retail sales
> on the Web.
>
> Patent lawyers say it is rare for such injunctions to be issued in patent
> disputes. But the judge ruled that Amazon's case "demonstrated a reasonable
> likelihood of success on the basis of merits." Moreover, she wrote that
> Amazon would face "irreparable harm" if it did not have exclusive use of the
> one-click feature during the holidays, when as many as 10 million people are
> expected to shop online for the first time.
>
> This is the first ruling in what experts expect to be a flurry of disputes
> over patents related to Internet sites.
>
> Already Priceline.com has sued Microsoft, contending it violates Priceline's
> patented method for consumers to name their own price for hotel rooms.
>
> Barnesandnoble.com introduced its "Express Lane" one-click ordering system in
> May 1998.
>
> Experts say they expect many more such suits as patents filed over the last
> few years are granted.
>
> "This injunction is going to send shockwaves through boardrooms across the
> country," said Robert Greene Sterne, a patent lawyer with Sterne, Kessler,
> Goldstein & Fox in Washington. "Internet companies that have not been filing
> for patents, for whatever reason, are going to be in a tough spot."
>
> At issue in this case is a feature on Amazon's Web site, introduced in
> September 1997, called "one click ordering." It enables customers to click on
> a single button on a screen to order an item. To use the feature, customers
> must have previously registered their names, addresses and credit card
> information.
>
> But the judge did provide an alternative for Barnesandnoble. She ruled that
> the patent specifically incorporates methods to purchase an item over the
> Internet "using only a single action."
>
> The judge wrote: "The evidence indicates that Barnesandnoble.com can modify
> its 'Express Lane' feature with relative ease.
>
> For instance, infringement can be avoided by simply requiring users to take
> an additional action to confirm orders."
>
> Jonathan Bulkeley, the chief executive of Barnesandnoble, said the company
> would soon replace its one-click system with one that requires two clicks to
> order.
>
> He said this would be part of an improved system that the company had planned
> to introduce next year. After clicking the first button, next to the name of
> a book, the customer will now see several options, such as a choice of
> shipping addresses. Clicking on one of those will complete the order.
>
> Nonetheless, Barnesandnoble said it would immediately appeal the preliminary
> injunction and that it ultimately expected to win the case after a full
> trial.
>
> The Barnes & Noble bookstore chain owns about 40 percent of the online
> company's stock, as does Bertelsmann, the big German publishing concern.
> Public shareholders own the remaining stock. Barnesandnoble.com has marketing
> relationships with other sites, including The New York Times on the Web,
> which refers potential customers to Barnesandnoble.com through advertising
> links on its books section.
>
> ========================================