Acacia's Latest Target: NetFlix
from the sue,-sue,-sue dept
Acacia has become one of the most hated firms by technology companies that actually do stuff. That's because Acacia is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) firms out there in the business of buying up patents solely to sue companies. Acacia learned a while ago, though, that it was best to keep its name out of many of these suits, so it apparently tries to set up subsidiaries for many of the patents it buys (sometimes giving them silly names to make people think the companies actually do something). Now, one of those subsidiaries, named Refined Recommendation Corporation is suing Netflix over a patent it holds on optimizing interest potential. It's a patent on the idea of making recommendations or presenting specific information based on user actions. I can recall both individuals and companies working on similar things well before this patent was applied for in 2000, but that's a different issue altogether. Does anyone believe that Netflix (and plenty of other companies) wouldn't be doing content recommendations for people without this particular "breakthrough"?
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
Filed Under: patent trolls, patents
Companies: acacia, netflix, refined recommendation corporation
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Seems to me ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also recommends...
Seriously though, this could apply to any company that has a recommendation display. Pandora, Amazon, iTunes, and just about any online retailer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So stupid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Acacia
Prior Art all over the place. Beat these scumbags down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So Stupid
First of all, that there is even a patent for this blows my mind. This process has been going on as long as there has been trade. Why would a patent have even been issued on this? Don't get me wrong, in many cases I am for patents. Used correctly they can help smaller businesses gain thie foothold in markets innundated with monolithic multi-nationals. Unfortunately our judicial system and government tends to promote the abuse of the system.
Second of all, how can anyone have the sheer gall to patent an idea that has been around for over a thousand years? This one should be chucked out the window and Refined Recomendation Corporation should be levied some heavy fines.
And finally, how can any judge sitting this case not see it for what it is, armed robbery. Refined Recomendation Corporation may not be holding the gun itself, but that hasn't seemed to matter in other cases of armed robbery. "Give us $20mil or we have our government lackies kill you NetFlix!" Or, if you like, it's at least blackmail. No wonder our country is falling apart with the government allowing, no encouraging, such travesties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So Stupid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
great country
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Common Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Common Sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Time to Patent Trolling
Only seems fair.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Time to Patent Trolling
http://techdirt.com/articles/20071021/141623.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TX Federal Eastern District
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Down the shitter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
organ donors needed
contribute something useful to society !
donate your unneeded brains to feed hungry children
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dan Didn't Do Dallas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent
...oh and while I am at it, ..I will patent loopholes
and sue everybody that finds a way around the patent process
Anybody want to join me and make it class action law suit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oldest Profession
Find out what they want and offer it to them.
I think I could find an example of prior art in the bible:
Genesis 3:6
Adam, if you like that fruit then you will also like this fruit, mmm, tasty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
shell game
The patent does not seem to cover how the user preference would be calculated - merely that it would be calculated in some way which depends on user input and content. So anyone who filtered content for display and tried to refine the filter based on user feedback would be afoul of the patent.
The real challenge is the mechanics of calculating the user preference. Netflix has offered a Million dollar prize for anyone who can make a 10% improvement over their existing system ( www.netflixprize.com )
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would you like fries with that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My new patent:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem with the patent office is that until relatively recently (maybe 10 years or so) it was not necessarily recognized as possible to patent things such as business models or software algorithms. A lot of bad patents have gotten through because of the volume of new patent applications in this area and because this was (is) out of the domain of expertise of the many of the patent reviewers. No excuse, but reality. Once a bad patent has been granted it is very hard to get it nullified (see above).
The problem with the complainants is that they want to supplant the judgment of one overworked bureaucrat (the patent reviewer) with another (the judge), or better yet supplant both of their judgments by the rule of the mob depending upon how likable or sympathetic the patent holder and alleged patent violator are.
This should eventually work itself out. Personally, I do not see the validity of patenting a business process or algorithm, but that is merely opinion and in conflict with USPTO policy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Duty of disclosure
Leaving the validating of a patent to occur in a court room is problematic at best. Corrupt justice system, jury pool intelligence borders on functionality handicapped, and that doesn't even address victims of the fraudulent patent who never made it to court.
Hence when people gush about patents and how good they are I pretty much place that person into a delusional category, usually the same people think "free markets" are possible to, but hey they say ignorance is bliss so at least they're happy. :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Predatory Practices
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent trolls
Suits by patent trolls are particularly hard to defend against, and especially with a certain court in Lufkin TX which seems to be a magnet for patent trolls, which almost invariably finds in favor of the patent holder and issues exorbitant judgments to the trolls. A portfolio of a million defensive patents is useless against a patent troll because a patent troll practices no invention and and therefore can't infringe anyone else's patents. Their only inventions are the patents themselves. About the only defense against patent trolls is to get the patent invalidated, and that can cost 10s of millions of dollars, putting that strategy out of reach for all except large corporations.
Perhaps congress could pass a law that in order for a patent to be valid, the owner of the patent must also be the owner of the thing patented. And there should be stiff penalties for those who use patents abusively, including large monetary penalties and invalidation of the patents so used. But I suspect congress is so much in the thrall of large corporations it is doubtful they would do such a thing unless forced to by a major grassroots outcry from ordinary citizens like you and I.
So. want to do something? Write to your congressmen!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But NetFlix itself is prior art!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]