It's interesting why they are doing it in New Zealand. Perhaps because they feel they need to make some money here to finance their future litigation in the US? If the e-commerce industry in New Zealand (however it may be defined) feels this is a threat, it would be a good idea for somebody to get in touch with a relevant body in the US (e.g. the US Internet Industry Association http://www.usiia.org/) to get some support to deal with threat.
Cheers, Andrei Link -----Original Message----- From: Vicki Hyde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:16 AM To: Canterbury Software Email Forum Subject: [csforum] NZ e-tailers dunned for patent breach Here's something to make you sit up and take notice, if you're into ecommerce services and solutions: Canadian company DE Technologies has been granted patents in New Zealand, the US and Singapore covering cross-border e-commerce processes, which range from currency conversion and electronic invoicing to creating databases of purchase histories, and local patent lawyers James & Wells are already dunning small operations here for a "signing fee" of US$10,000 ($16,762) and a "royalty rate" of 1.5 per cent of website transaction value. DET also wanted 11 centsUS for documents generated - from commercial invoices to packaging lists and import declarations. DET are also taking on internet providers with a licensing model that would apply to ISPs which host infringing e-commerce operators and would involve paying an upfront fee of US$25,000 covering 25 merchants and a further US$1000 for each additional e-tailer it hosts. This licence type would attract a royalty rate of 1.15 per cent of total transaction value and 5.5USc per document produced. More on this story here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3511627 Any IP law folks interested in commenting? Is this a beat-up, or something we should take note of? And if the latter, what, if anything, can be done or should be done? Beats me how having a database of purchases can be patentable (does this actually differ substantially from non-electronic practice??), but the law works in mysterious ways... Sounds like it could mean a major shutdown of ecommerce for NZ operations if this is really enforceable. The Herald story covers one small operator which sounds likely to have to go out of business rather than continuing, and there have been a number of these letters go out it seems. Maybe there's a whole new business there -- see if you can get a patent in NZ to cover a Web solution of some sort and then see how many businesses you can bankrupt... Gloomily, Vicki Hyde ====================================================== SPIS Ltd, Box 19-760, Christchurch, NZ http://.spis.co.nz * FREE TurboNote+ sticky note trial: http://TurboNote.com --> via Canterbury Software email forum: Success through Connections Email your messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Searchable list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Leave or rejoin the list: http://canterburysoftware.org.nz/forum.htm --> via Canterbury Software email forum: Success through Connections Email your messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Searchable list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Leave or rejoin the list: http://canterburysoftware.org.nz/forum.htm
