Because Without The Patent System No One Would Ever Think To Barter Online
from the well,-why-not? dept
Just yesterday we were discussing why societies tended to move away from bartering and to a monetary-based transaction system because it was more efficient. Specifically, we were discussing why the idea behind Peerflix and the multitude of other online bartering sites seem unlikely to become particularly compelling businesses. However, there was one other point, not covered in the original article on Peerflix's move away from a strict barter site. It appears that the company is excited to start enforcing a patent it recently bought that covers method of exchanging goods over the internet. Effectively, the patent covers a computer-based bartering system. It takes the concept of bartering, puts it on a network, and voila, it's suddenly patentable, despite thousands upon thousands of years of history concerning how barter systems work. The fact that there have been a ton of online bartering companies over the years apparently isn't evidence enough that this is hardly a "non-obvious" idea. But, of course, now that Peerflix owns the patent, they might as well use it: "There would be no reason to own the patent unless we intended to flex our muscles around it," claims the company's CEO. Given the failure of the company's original business model (similar to the failures of every other bartering-based business models) this looks like yet another case of failed companies falling back on patent lawsuits.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh look, there you are calling people names again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
A warning to anyone working on a way to barter onlinne, Peerflix's lawyers have their eyes and ears open and actively looking for anyone that starts anything close to an online bartering busness.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MySpace
see also:
A wise man gets more use from his enemies than a fool from his friends.
I forgot both the sources :/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Given that it costs a few pennies to register a domain and 10 minutes to knock up a plausible website, doesn't anybody see a way of scamming them? I mean, why get all ethical about it, the so called patent speaks for itself. :)
Having said that, it contains 51 parametric conditionals summarised in 7 flowcharts necessarily requiring a database of pre-existing members, an elaborate negotiation system and criteria matching procedure and only applies to books, DVDs, games and the like. It is suboptimal in two important respects and contains at least one error.
In short, it's a crock, and anybody with an IQ in double figures could "invent" a better barter method.
What is cool is that it shows exactly how NOT to implement a working system since we know the company behind it failed, and not to employ Donna R. Moore to "invent" any software for you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
My bartering commodities
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
it's also interesting i made a friend... :) bumbling old guy likes to call me ignorant but doesn't like to provide proof of said ignorance (i'd almost think he was ignorant about the meaning of the word :x) :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Only when you go off spouting your uninformed OPINION as if it were fact and pre-flaming anyone who doesnt agree with you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
At the ISP.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]