Store Payment Info In Your Online Store? Watch Out For Patent Infringement Lawsuits

from the pay-now dept

Bill Squier alerts us to the news that a bunch of companies have been sued for daring to store consumer payment information and allow either stored value payments or one-click payments on their site. The article linked here focuses on Apple as a defendant, and notes 14 other companies were sued as well, but in researching this, I found that Joe Mullin actually wrote about another batch of companies (20 of them) that were sued back in April. The earlier lawsuit included Google, Wal-Mart, Bank of America, Capital One, JP Morgan Chase, Mastercard, Visa, Vivendi, Disney and Western Union among others. The more recent lawsuit has (as mentioned) Apple, Best Buy, Amazon, American Express, Barnes & Noble, Citigroup and eBay among others. So... basically any online e-commerce site, credit card company or big bank.

As for the patents in question, they're all a variation on a "method and apparatus for conducting electronic commerce transactions using electronic tokens." The specific patents are 7,376,621, 7,249,099, 7,328,189 and 7,177,838. Reading through the claims, this seems like an incredibly typical online system for storing payment info and seeing if the person can actually pay. Since the patent system defenders among our readers get quite upset whenever I say something seems "obvious" to me, let's flip this around. Can anyone explain how these concepts were not obvious at the time of filing?

Not surprisingly, the cases have been filed in Marshall, Texas... and as Joe Mullin figured out, the guy who is running "Actus" is a lawyer known for representing some infamous patent hoarding companies. He also discovered that the lawyer representing Actus in these lawsuits appears to share an office (or at least the same address) with the son (who is also a patent attorney) of the judge handling the case. At some point, do people start questioning whether or not there's a conflict of interest there?

Filed Under: patents, payment
Companies: actus, amazon, american express, apple, bank of america, barnes & noble, best buy, capital one, citigroup, disney, ebay, google, jp morgan, mastercard, visa, vivendi, wal-mart, western union

L'Oreal Loses To eBay In The UK This Time... Where Else Will It Try?

from the if-you-fail...-just-sue-elsewhere dept

You may recall that L'Oreal has been on an incredibly misguided legal campaign against eBay, blaming the company for the fact that some of its users are selling fake L'Oreal products on the site. Rather than go after the actual counterfeiters, L'Oreal insists that eBay's at fault. After losing its lawsuit in Belgium last summer, the company filed nearly identical lawsuits in the UK, France, Germany and Spain, hoping that somewhere one of those courts would side with it. So far, it's not looking good. Two weeks back, even France sided with eBay, even though it had ruled otherwise in similar cases. And now comes the news that late last week, the UK sided with eBay as well. At some point, will L'Oreal finally realize that maybe it's barking up the wrong tree?

Filed Under: liability, trademark, uk
Companies: ebay, l'oreal

Good Surprise: French Court Actually Sides With eBay On Counterfeiting Liability

from the getting-it-right dept

While US courts have generally been good about recognizing that eBay is not liable for eBay users selling counterfeit goods on the site, France in the past had gotten the story backwards, saying that eBay was liable, even though the actions were by its users, not by eBay itself. However, in a rather surprising move, a French court has actually sided with eBay against L'Oreal in a similar case. This is a surprise -- but a good one. This is L'Oreal's second loss in such cases against eBay. It lost another such case in nearby Belgium -- but (of course) has also filed similar lawsuits around the globe, hoping that at least one of those courts will side with it over eBay. Hopefully, all of them take notice of how both Belgium and France have ruled, and recognize that this is not eBay's liability.

Filed Under: counterfeits, france, liability, trademark
Companies: ebay, l'oreal

Troubling Court Ruling: Company Not Allowed To Resell Radar Detectors Online

from the no-first-sale dept

Over the years, we've had plenty of stories about companies trying to limit the ability of resellers to sell their products online, with companies claiming that reselling shampoo or cosmetics on eBay is somehow illegal because of a contract the wholesaler made with its own resellers. Usually these lawsuits don't get very far. Whatever agreement the wholesaler and the reseller had, the eventual seller online usually wasn't a party to those agreements and isn't bound by them -- and (reasonably) the courts recognize that you shouldn't be barred from reselling a product you legally purchased (that whole first sale thing).

However, there are some exceptions, and Eric Goldman points us to the latest one. A reseller of radar detectors has effectively been barred from selling a certain brand on eBay, claiming that it was trademark infringement. But what about those first sale rights? Well, apparently this case gets around them by claiming that the product being resold by this company Midwest Inventory Distribution is a different product, because it doesn't come with the same warranty (Midwest offers its own warranty and the original company, Beltronics, refuses to honor warranties on these resold radar detectors). The court also seemed to have problems with the fact that Midwest didn't properly "disclose" this information, even though every auction stated clearly that Midwest offered its own warranty and Beltronics wouldn't provide any warranty coverage.

As Goldman notes, this seems based on some questionable theories, and conceivably could allow companies to skirt around first sale rules, by claiming that anyone reselling their products online are engaging in trademark infringement, because the "warranties" on the products are different -- even if the products themselves are really identical. As Goldman writes:

The net result then is that eBay buyers willing to pay a discount for an identical radar detector but with only Midwest's warranty instead of Beltronics' won't get that choice. Instead, they get the pleasure of buying at the minimum resale price set by Beltronics.

Filed Under: radar detectors, resellers, trademark
Companies: beltronics, ebay, midwest inventory distribution

L'Oreal Looks For Friendlier Locales In Its Suits Against eBay

from the you-can-even-shop-for-jurisdictions-easily-online dept

US courts have generally recognized that eBay isn't liable for the actions of people who use its site to sell counterfeit goods, though a recent decision went the other way. This situation reflects the lack of uniformity around the world in this type of case: for instance, eBay was found liable in France, but was not in Belgium. In the Belgian case, eBay was sued by cosmetics maker L'Oreal, but the company hasn't let the ruling slow it down, as it's now filed a similar suit in the UK. It's also sued eBay in France, Germany and Spain -- which could lead one to believe that it's jurisdiction shopping, simply filing suits in many different countries and seeing what sticks, with the hopes that victory in one place will force eBay to play ball worldwide. The issue of eBay's lack of liability as a platform provider remains an important one, but the problem of international jurisdiction shopping remains a massive one for companies online.

Filed Under: auctions, jurisdiction shopping, resale, trademark
Companies: ebay, l'oreal

Swedish Indie Band Release Only One Copy Of Their Latest Song Via eBay Art Project

from the it's-the-souvenir dept

Sweden is home, of course, to the folks who run The Pirate Bay, but it's also the home of numerous indie bands and indie labels that are doing some really interesting experiments that focus on embracing the opportunities and possibilities presented by technology, rather than fighting against it all. Dan Sellberg writes in to alert us to an amusing experiment by the band Bob Hund, who is releasing a new song, called Fantastiskt, but they're doing so by selling the only copy in existence of the song on eBay as an art project:

"Fantastiskt" will be sold and delivered as an art piece comprising; the original master dubplate vinyl (the only existing copy) mounted on a real working turntable with cover art, song lyrics and monogram etched onto the lid by the artist Martin Kann.

The publisher insists that this will be the only release of this single. Talk about taking "scarcity" to a different level... Obviously, this is something of a publicity stunt, but it's not a bad one.

Filed Under: bob hund, indie, music, sweden
Companies: ebay

Is eBay Warming Up The Skype Billion-Dollar Buyout Plan?

from the round-two dept

Back in 2005, we marveled at the success that Skype backers had in talking up the price of the company, eventually suckering convincing eBay to put together a $4 billion deal for it. This was what we dubbed the "Skype Billion-Dollar Buyout Plan" in which companies used press hype to create valuations far above their actual worth (see YouTube and Facebook for a couple of examples). Of course, what eBay was never really clear on was how it planned to make money from Skype, and it later went back and forth on whether it had given up on looking for the mythical "synergies" between Skype and its core auction business. Last week, eBay's CEO conceded that those synergies were "minimal" -- leading to more speculation that eBay might spin Skype off.

And thus the cycle begins again, with a figure of $900 million to $1.2 billion tossed out there as a potential starting point for the second version of the Skype Billion-Dollar Buyout Plan. What's interesting is that just like four years ago, Skype's financials are murky, as Om Malik points out. The company also still faces the same big problem: monetization. As Skype gets bigger, that problem could become even more difficult. After all, if Skype continues to garner more and more users, more and more calls will shift from the paid SkypeOut service to free Skype-to-Skype calls. Skype is said to be profitable (although there's no indication of how profitable), but it seems pretty clear that it hasn't been the runaway success that would have justified its $4 billion price tag. While it's possible that any current sale could carry a more realistic price, somehow we imagine that eBay will try to use the same tactic that drove up its price for Skype to drive up the next buyer's price.

Filed Under: acquisition, buyouts, hype
Companies: ebay, skype

Monster Mini Golf Using eBay To Fight Monster Cable's Trademark Lawsuit

from the good-for-them dept

Monster Cable is famously litigious over its trademark -- suing just about anyone who uses the name "Monster" as a part of their corporate offering. Most of these lawsuits are bogus -- as trademark only covers the specific areas of business you're in, and doesn't give you complete control over the name. Thus, if you make a salt lick for deer called Monster Deer Block, you shouldn't have to worry about a lawsuit from Monster Cable... but you'd still get one, as pretty much everyone from the TV show Monster Garage to the Boston Red Sox (for the "Monster seats" on top of the "Green Monster" wall in left field) have found out.

Earlier this year, the company went after a small mini-golf operation in California called Monster Mini Golf, which we doubted anyone would confuse with the cable makers. Apparently, that wasn't the only Monster Mini Golf that Monster's lawyers were busy hassling. Chris Collett alerts us to the fact that a Rhode Island based Monster Mini Golf is also facing a lawsuit, and asking for help. But, there's an interesting twist here. The company is pleading it's case on eBay, and asking people to contribute to its defense fund via eBay. I'm not sure if this goes against eBay's terms of service, though I hope it doesn't. (Update: It did go against eBay's ToS, so it was taken down -- but the company has put up a new auction for a coupon at Monster Mini Golf which will serve the same purpose):

BUT...one man is destined to crush what we have built. He is the founder of Monster Cable Inc. (a company that makes Audio cables) and he's suing us for "Trademark Infringement".

In a nutshell, trademark infringement is based solely on "Likelihood of Confusion", or essentially, "could the average consumer be confused between the two?". The answer is no, as decided by the Patent and Trademark Office when they granted our trademarks, but Monster Cable Inc filed an opposition against that decision, and sued us.

To this day, this one man has opposed approx 400 companies...and it doesn't look like he EVER intends to stop. This is the true meaning of Corporate Bully.

Their tactic is to run the smaller companies out of money, and force them into a settlement where they surrender their name to Monster Cable Inc, who then licenses it back to them for a fee. Yes, so then we would be paying him for a concept and business we created and have worked very hard for! It is essentially extortion, but sadly, it is cheaper than going to trial, which can be crippling to small businesses like ours.

Unlike the 414 companies he has forced into settlement by bleeding them dry.... we have decided to continue on and fight the good fight. We have chosen to stand up for anyone who has ever been bullied, picked on, abused, or otherwise forced into an unfair or unjust situation by a bigger, stronger, (or in this case, richer) opponent.

Each small business that was forced to sign over their name is one more brick in the massive Monster Cable Inc wall, held together by the blood of those crushed beneath their corporate wheels. It is very very sad.

So far our legal fees are well over $100,000. (And counting) and will likely reach $250,000 when all is said and done. No wonder why 400 companies have waived the white flag!! 250K is the cost of "Winning"!! We need your help, we cannot afford to do it alone. Wondering if this is real or not...just google Monster Mini Golf and Cable. Or visit audioholics web site and you will also read about many other cases there as well.

What we are selling is a "Piece" of our legal defense and a small slice of Justice to you for $1. Yep, just a buck....and as Sally Struthers once said, that's less than a cup of coffee! Geez...at Starbucks, it wouldn't even buy you that!

In return for your gracious purchase, you will receive a heartfelt "Thank You" from us and the knowledge that you have helped defeat a corporate bully who has been abusing the legal system for years! And, if you print your paypal receipt and take it to any Monster Mini Golf location, we'll take $2 Off a round of Mini Golf! (that's double your money back! Reg price for 18 holes is between $5.50-$7.50)

This is interesting, as I hadn't heard that Monster Cable was apparently selling the Monster name back to people it bullied. That's even more obnoxious -- and a clear abuse of trademark law. Also, it's been a while since we've seen companies using eBay auctions for PR, so maybe that's making a comeback. Either way, if you want to help stop one of the biggest trademark bullies out there, maybe try to buy a share of the legal defenses, and hope eBay doesn't take the auction down.

Filed Under: monster, trademark
Companies: ebay, monster cable, monster mini golf

eBay Has To Turn Over Info On Canadian PowerSellers

from the can't-get-off-that-easy dept

Michael Geist points us to the news that a Canadian court has told eBay Canada that it needs to cough up info on Canadian PowerSellers. The case involves attempts by the Canadian government to determine if eBay PowerSellers are underreporting earnings on their taxes. Canadian tax officials had asked eBay Canada to hand over data on various Canadian PowerSellers, but the company refused, noting that the info was actually held by eBay in the US, and thus the data was not subject to the Canada Revenue Agency's jurisdiction. The court disagreed, noting that eBay Canada had easy access to the data at a "click of the mouse." For the most part, this does make sense, though it does raise some questions about jurisdictions. Perhaps this is a special case, due to the close relationship between eBay and eBay Canada, but it still is a bit worrisome that a Canadian court would rule that info on an American server is subject to Canadian laws. You could see that coming back up in a bad way in the future.

Filed Under: canada, jurisdiction, powersellers, us
Companies: ebay

Microsoft Steps Up Program To Bribe Users To Search

from the pay-up dept

Apparently Microsoft's ongoing program to bribe users to use its search engine wasn't getting enough attention, and the company seems to be upping the ante. At least for a little while, it's now giving 25% cash back on eBay purchases (limited to $200). At some point, you really have to wonder how well this program really works. Sure, some folks may use Microsoft's search to get the cashback (or to game the system), but will they keep it up when Microsoft isn't paying? That's not at all clear, and it seems likely that Microsoft could be paying out a lot more than it gets back in benefits.

Filed Under: bribes, search
Companies: ebay, microsoft