uspto.gov seems to be infringing also...

When researching the Infonautics patents I was sent to the following link which begins:

|http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=...ft.usp to.gov

This link contains a reference to 'homeurl', which identifies the page from which the link was clicked. This would appear to be somewhat similar to the technique that Amazon is being sued for using.


2hp

true, but USPTO isn't running any affiliate program to track clickthrus for commission/marketing tracking.

this patent would be able to be beaten by showing CGI linking from one website to another, and that it would be an obvious extension to track clicks, etc.

what is needed is a silver bullet of an adult affiliate program that was running before sept 1995.


Fight the emphasis!

Didn't PK, Greenguy, Marks Bookmarks and the other big linklists start around '94? I wonder what they were using for advertisers at the beginning? They must have been among the very first to sign up with the very first affiliate programs I would think. If anyone can help it would be the brandname linklists I would think.

if i recall correctly in her interview, PK was just getting paid flat rate with no tracking urls... just winging it in the beginning (which most of us did) :)

Anyone maybe know of any CGI/web programmers back in 94-95 time period that might have worked on affliate programming?

please have them contact me or if you have their contact info via ICQ.

Fight the inquiry!

last bump from me.... if prior art can't be found, then this patent could come trolling through the affiliate programs.... and imagine if the patent owners have some moral "high ground", that they refuse to license it to paysites and charge high rates for paying for prior infringement... what the government could never do, business can.... shudder at that thought.

you can try to change the way you run your affiliate linking today, but that just stops the clock on infringement. They can go for infringement all the way back to 1998 when the patent was approved.



Fight the crystal ball!

I will help all I can, but it's not clear why prior art is needed of *affiliate* application, when the patent is for URL info pass-forward, or why it needs to be from Adult?

2hp

You know I've been a programmer for a long time and passing a variable is NOT a new idea its basic programming.. To say passing a variable for any specific reason is patentable is a joke. Its like saying I invented passing a variable to put you name on a web page.

any programmer knows that one.

They would have to say any affiliate program was their idea. And the idea of a salesman on commision is as old as dirt and mute. It will never fly

as a fellow programmer who was doing web development back in '95 i absolutely agree with you. The patent can be shredded apart by expert witness who could explain how passing of variables in the URL to a CGI script and doing something with it (like counter, etc) was "obvious".

Amazon has done a year's worth of research, and I am sure their own developers are saying the same thing, but at the stage of the court process that they are in, if they can show an affiiliate program before sep 1995 using a link with an affiliate identifier, then this patent case can be dismissed.

If they cannot find this mythical silver bullet, then they have to go to court and go through discovery and then court.. which after a few years and a few million dollars, they would unravel this patent.

During the time that amazon is tied up in courts, this BTG company can then go around and try to pick up others to license their patent, citing that Barnes&Nobles and Netflix licensed, and how they are now in court with Amazon.

While corporate america can certainly take care of itself, the problem is that corporate america does need the silver bullet to shoot down this beast of a patent infringement claim. If they aren't the ones holding the big gun, then it makes it harder for middle to small sized companies to carry the financial burden of going to court.

So there needs to be a clear demonstration of an affiliate program prior to Sept 1995, that comes through either the program owner or a programmer who can testify and document that such an occurence happened.


Fight the patent!

the amazon patent attorneys have already looked all through mainstream, and they have some potential leads, but no silver bullets.

they believe that the adult biz must hold the answer to technological breakthrough of an affiliate program prior to the patent filing in sept 1995.


Fight the needle!

funny you should say that, microsoft tried to patten smillies haha. S Truit Cathy the founder of chic fil a pattented the Chic-fil-a chicken sandwhich and the term waffle potato fry. He also created the food court, people will claim anything and sometimes they get away with it.....

Come to think about it Capcom sued SNK over the rights to fighting games based on real martial arts styles, maybe I should go in patent some things that already existed and sue!

holy prior art batman... i think i may have found the prior art !

chasing down this pretty solid lead. if this lead works out, then it can be presented in court at end of January.. and if this lead is the silver bullet, you'll hear about it from me.

Fight the shhhhh, it's a secret!

So if they identify it as patent, what does that mean for the adult industry?

If the prior art lead is solid, then it means Amazon can beat down this claimed patent over affiliate programs, and all affiliate programs (adult and mainstream) will have one less patent to worry about.

This one is particularly troubling because of its very early filing date and the broadness of the patent, that would make it the foundation patent for all other patents filed on affiliate program.


Fight the patent!