18 ms·
Amazon owes $525M in cloud-storage patent fight, US jury says
- tebbers 2y agoHaven’t got a huge amount of sympathy since Amazon patented 1-click checkout.
- moffkalast 2y agoYou know what... patenting dark patterns so nobody else can use them is alright in my book.
- jsyang00 2y agoSeems like they are patent trolling to me. Hope Amazon wins the appeal. Nightmare for their corporate counsel to have to walk a jury through this and just hope for the best
- RecycledEle 2y agoCan someone please ELI5: What tech did the patent cover?
- digestivetires 2y ago.
- ranger_danger 2y agoprior art basically.
- booi 2y agocommon sense
- tsimionescu 2y agoThey cover some methods for distributed storage systems that seem inspired by how DNS works.
- TruthWillHurt 2y agoApparently by taking prior art (DNS, server,user interface), and packaging it into a single "product" (DNS software optimized for specific hardware) - You've created a new thing. INNOVATION!
- manicennui 2y agoWhich is basically how software engineering is done.
- akira2501 2y agoKove owns three data storage patents that it alleges AWS has infringed: U.S. Patent No. 7,103,640 (the '640 Patent), entitled "Network Distributed Tracking Wire Transfer Protocol"; U.S. Patent No. 7,814,170 (the '170 Patent), entitled "Network Distributed Tracking Wire Transfer Protocol"; and U.S. Patent No. 7,233,978 (the '978 Patent), entitled "Method and Apparatus for Managing Location Information in a Network Separate From the Data to Which the Location Information Pertains."
- fuzzfactor 2y ago"Method and Apparatus for Managing Location Information in a Network Separate From the Data to Which the Location Information Pertains." IOW the Dewey Decimal system, but with a computer.
- chessgecko 2y agoLinks to two of the patents that were infringed https://patents.google.com/patent/US7103640B1/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US7103640B1/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US7233978B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US7233978B2/en I really hope Kove loses, I don't know too much about networking, but a few header fields don't really seem patentworthy to me.
- tsimionescu 2y agoThis doesn't seem like a few protocol fields, but about the entire mechanism of distributing the information and how to get from a request to any one server in the distributed network to the one that actually stores the information you requested (at least looking at the claims in your first patent). I have no idea if there was prior art or how close the procedure they describe was to known storage algorithms in 2000 when the application was made, so I'm not saying this is a valid patent, but it doesn't seem like a completely frivolous patent to me at first glance. Of course, if indeed AWS came to a very similar implementation themselves, as the jury found, then that further suggests that the idea is not that novel.
- chessgecko 2y agoMy read of patent one is that they basically created DNS for storage. But DNS was invented in 1983 so I'm not really sure what was novel here other than pointing it at data, which uses a few extra headers, ala my comment. Even if there was nothing closer to this than DNS I don't think this patent should be valid.
- tsimionescu 2y agoI think that in general, "use solution A to problem X to solve problem Y instead" is, in principle, a valid patent - assuming that it's not obvious that solution A would help with problem Y. After all, patents are about "how do I solve problem Y", not about the general algorithms themselves. However, the "it's not obvious" part is very important. Not working in the field, it's not at all clear to me if using DNS for data was an obvious idea in ~2000 for building a distributed DB or not.
- overstay8930 2y agolol this is an insane ruling, there’s no way this will actually happen.
- CobrastanJorji 2y agoI looked up the first of the patents. Here's its PDF: https://ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/7814180 https://ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/7... I'm not a patent lawyer, just a programmer, but reading just the abstract, this seems to be covering a DNS system that can be configured via an API, which I guess does cover S3, but also, like, almost every other domain-related thing?
- tsimionescu 2y agoMy reading of the claims is that they are mostly for a DNS server implemented using an object-oriented database, mapping the object tre with the DNS hierarchy and dedudcing IP at each level. The rest is just this principle as pure software or as a hardware appliance with pre-installed software, and with a GUI to control the object mappings. But the central idea seems to be the OO aspect. Edit: also, this doesn't seem to be the right patent. Another poster cites three different patents, one with a similar number to this one (the correct patent is 7,814,170, the one you cite is 7,814,180).
- CobrastanJorji 2y agoThere were three counts the jury found in favor of Kove, one for each of these patents: > as follows: (a) On Count 1 of plaintiff’s complaint, finding infringement by defendant of U.S. Patent No. 7,814,180; (b) On Count 2 of plaintiff’s complaint, finding infringement by defendant of U.S. Patent No. 7,233,978; (c) On Count 3 of plaintiff’s complaint, finding infringement by defendant of U.S. Patent No. 7,103,640. -Verdict ( https://tmsnrt.rs/49wWwvB https://tmsnrt.rs/49wWwvB ) The patent I listed was Count 1. However, other online sources ( https://casetext.com/case/kove-io-inc-v-amazon-web-servs-3 https://casetext.com/case/kove-io-inc-v-amazon-web-servs-3 ) list patent 7814170 instead of 180, so the verdict form may have gotten it wrong?
- tsimionescu 2y agoInteresting. Given that '180 is assigned to InfoBlox and '170 is assigned to Econnectix like the other 2 patents, I believe that '170 is more likely to be the patent they actually used in the suit, and the verdict form has a typo.
- DarkmSparks 2y agoIm still very undecided on software patents and have been since they were first awarded software patents in general are a bad idea imho, go trade secret and never let the ideas enter the public domain. otoh society benefits a lot from good ideas entering the public domain, and the patent system is fairly effective at stopping everyone keeping their secret sauce a secret. Since the US has them, and this decision seems fairly clear cut (or Amazon and google would have got them thrown out as invalid already) about all I can say is congratulations to Kove.
- radicalbyte 2y agoI've yet to see a software patent which wouldn't have been reinvented by someone else looking at the same problem. The thing with software is that the cost to experiment is extremely low compared to other fields so we can, and do, "just try it". At this point in my career for example everything I do is basically tweaking or adapting patterns I've seen in other systems to the ones I'm working on.
- somewho 2y agoCost to experiment being low doesn't make non-obvious ideas obvious. As a trained researcher with patents I'm no longer surprised by how often simple ideas have remained undiscovered for decades.
- tobyjsullivan 2y agoI’d be curious to hear an anecdote about a single software patent that benefited society at large. For example, I agree it would be very interesting and arguably valuable to have a public document describing how Amazon built S3. Unfortunately, these patents don’t describe what AWS did. They describe how some random “inventor” thought a system like that could be built (more realistically, of course, that rando likely never dreamed of any valuable application like S3).
- newsclues 2y agoIf software patents were to become a good thing the duration of the patent should be very short.
- spxneo 2y agopatents, copyright are ridiculous concepts that no longer make sense in the age of AI and large language models if you do not want somebody copying your idea, cutting the price and cornering the market, then you simply should not put it out in the world at all. behind every patent litigation is the threat of violence pure and simple. violence is the building fabric of everything in the west. the same european colonial attitudes from 15th century that everything can be divided, labelled and sold backed by violence. skin colours, ideologies, copyright, patents are all cut from the same ilk! so much of American concepts are echos of its European colonialism.
- estebarb 2y agoI don't get it, it is quite obvious that there are many prior art examples. Some easy ones are freenet and gnutella, both predating the patent by months. Even CODA filesystem (1987) checks all their patent claims.
- formvoltron 2y agoThey say don't feed the troll haha. But we realized if we feed the troll massive amounts of money then they can come back and pay more legal fees and create a need for our worthless court! Also the life of the startup entrepreneur is just too easy these days. They need to feel more stress that at any moment some rando from Florida can come in crush what they've been working on the last 7 years.
- xyst 2y agoThese patent trolls stifle innovation. Literal parasites.
- welder 2y agoAll software patent litigation is trolling. The patent system is broken.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y agoNo Datadome Javascript: https://www.xm.com/research/markets/allNews/reuters/amazon-owes-525-mln-in-cloudstorage-patent-fight-us-jury-says-53810411 https://www.xm.com/research/markets/allNews/reuters/amazon-o...
- Jochim 2y agoThe concept of intellectual property is antithetical to how humans have progressed socially and technologically for millenia. It's a wasteful aberration that strangles innovation with red tape and hands control of our culture over to those with the financial mean to claim to own it. The day we wrest back that control will be a good day.
- nness 2y agoThe first patent was issued in the 1400's — it is exactly how humans have progressed technologically and sociality. Let's stop being so absolutist about these topics. The problem here isn't that patents exist, intellectual property protection is critical to investment and research. The issue here is two fold: 1. Patents usually involve a lot of research — and existed as a way to ensure that competition couldn't imitate your product without also making that investment, licensing it from you, etc. If there was no protection, they would immediately undercut you since they don't have investment costs to cover. Tech patents, however, are so broad and require so little actual material science that the "protect the investment" part doesn't add up. 2. Patent offices couldn't keep up with the rapid rate of technical advancement and may have granted overly-broad patents for what we would now consider rather general topics. The only effective way to invalidate these patents is expensive and lengthy court proceedings — which is fair, if you think about it, you wouldn't want your rights taken away without a defence. But when weaponised, it can count-intuitively stifle the innovation it was trying to protect. What we need is a better criteria and definition of IP which better suits modern industry.
- fauigerzigerk 2y ago>1. Patents usually involve a lot of research — and existed as a way to ensure that competition couldn't imitate your product without also making that investment, licensing it from you, etc. I agree with the gist of your comment, but a fundamental issue with patents is that your investment in research can be destroyed if someone else independently did overlapping research and filed first.
- Leherenn 2y ago
- Seattle3503 2y agoBiggest cloud bill ever?
- VHRanger 2y agoIf you think that, clearly you've never used Oracle SQL!
- deepakc2025 2y ago[flagged]
- zoobab 2y agoUSPTO keep granting software patents despite Alice SCOTUS decision. This is a corrupt administration, that like the European Patent Office, finance itself over the amount of patents it grants.
- delfinom 2y agoNo my dude, these patents are expired 4 years ago. The problem with patents, you can file lawsuits over past infringement as long as the patent was valid when the infringement occurred.
- riskable 2y agoAmazon should just pay a bunch of people to write down a working implementation of the patent using a pencil and paper. It'd be a LOT of paper but it would meet the, "if it can be done with a pen and paper" criteria outlined in CLS Bank. It wouldn't even be complicated or difficult... Just tedious.
- somewho 2y agoI innovated and hold patents. I still don't know how I feel about patents and copyright. At the end of the day, patents and copyright didn't lead to me being rewarded for innovating. I wish there was a better way. Sometimes I wish AI could read everyone's claims and report who should be rewarded for what and by how much.
- dwaites 2y agoIn the future, there will be only two companies. One will hold the patent on walking up a hill, while the other will hold the patent on walking down a hill. The major debate will be whose patent you are violating if you are only halfway up.