amazon.html (12576B)
1 <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> 2 <!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 --> 3 <!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> 4 <!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays laws patents" --> 5 <!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> 6 <title>(Formerly) Boycott Amazon! - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> 7 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/amazon.translist" --> 8 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> 9 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" --> 10 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> 11 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> 12 <div class="article reduced-width"> 13 <h2>(Formerly) Boycott Amazon!</h2> 14 15 <div class="infobox"> 16 <p> 17 <i>The FSF decided to end its boycott of Amazon in September 2002. (We 18 forgot to edit this page at the time.) We could not tell the precise 19 result of the lawsuit against Barnes & Noble, but it did not seem to 20 be very harmful to the defendant. And Amazon had not attacked anyone 21 else.</i></p> 22 <p> 23 <i>Amazon has got a number of other menacing patents since then, but has 24 not as yet used them for aggression. Perhaps it will not do so. If 25 it does, we will take a look at how to denounce it.</i></p> 26 <p> 27 <i>The rest of this page is as it was in 2001 while the boycott 28 was active.</i></p> 29 </div> 30 31 <hr class="thin" /> 32 33 <p> 34 If you support the boycott, 35 <br /> 36 <em>Please make links to this page</em> 37 <br /> 38 <strong>http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon.html</strong> !!!! 39 </p> 40 41 <hr class="thin" /> 42 43 <h3 id="whyBoycott">Why we boycott Amazon</h3> 44 <p> 45 Amazon has obtained a <a href="/philosophy/amazonpatent.html">US 46 patent (5,960,411)</a> on an important and obvious idea for 47 E-commerce: an idea sometimes known as one-click purchasing. The idea 48 is that your command in a web browser to buy a certain item can carry 49 along information about your identity. (It works by sending the 50 server a “cookie,” a kind of ID code that your browser 51 received previously from the same server.)</p> 52 <p> 53 Amazon has sued to block the use of this simple idea, showing that 54 they truly intend to monopolize it. This is an attack against the 55 World Wide Web and against E-commerce in general.</p> 56 <p> 57 The idea patented here is just that a company can give you something 58 which you can subsequently show them to identify yourself for credit. 59 This is nothing new: a physical credit card does the same job, after 60 all. But the US Patent Office issues patents on obvious and 61 well-known ideas every day. Sometimes the result is a disaster.</p> 62 <p> 63 Today Amazon is suing one large company. If this were just a dispute 64 between two companies, it would not be an important public issue. But 65 the patent gives Amazon the power over anyone who runs a web site in 66 the US (and any other countries that give them similar patents)—power 67 to control all use of this technique. Although only one company is 68 being sued today, the issue affects the whole Internet.</p> 69 <p> 70 Amazon is not alone at fault in what is happening. The US Patent 71 Office is to blame for having very low standards, and US courts are to 72 blame for endorsing them. And US patent law is to blame for 73 authorizing patents on information-manipulating techniques and 74 patterns of communication—a policy that is harmful in general.</p> 75 76 <p> 77 Foolish government policies gave Amazon the opportunity—but an 78 opportunity is not an excuse. Amazon made the choice to obtain this 79 patent, and the choice to use it in court for aggression. The 80 ultimate moral responsibility for Amazon's actions lies with Amazon's 81 executives.</p> 82 <p> 83 We can hope that the court will find this patent is legally invalid. 84 Whether they do so will depend on detailed facts and obscure 85 technicalities. The patent uses piles of semi-relevant detail to make 86 this “invention” look like something subtle.</p> 87 <p> 88 But we do not have to wait passively for the court to decide the 89 freedom of E-commerce. There is something we can do right now: we can 90 refuse to do business with Amazon. Please do not buy anything from 91 Amazon until they promise to stop using this patent to threaten or 92 restrict other web sites.</p> 93 <p> 94 If you are the author of a book sold by Amazon, you can provide 95 powerful help to this campaign by putting this text into the 96 “author comment” about your book, on Amazon's web site. 97 (Alas, it appears they are refusing to post these comments for 98 authors.)</p> 99 <p> 100 If you have suggestions, or if you simply support the boycott, please 101 send mail to <a href="mailto:amazon@gnu.org"><amazon@gnu.org></a> 102 to let us know.</p> 103 <p> 104 Amazon's response to people who write about the patent contains a 105 subtle misdirection which is worth analyzing:</p> 106 <blockquote><p> 107 The patent system is designed to encourage innovation, and we spent 108 thousands of hours developing our 1-ClickR shopping feature. 109 </p></blockquote> 110 <p> 111 If they did spend thousands of hours, they surely did not spend it 112 thinking of the general technique that the patent covers. So if they 113 are telling the truth, what did they spend those hours doing?</p> 114 <p> 115 Perhaps they spent some of the time writing the patent application. 116 That task was surely harder than thinking of the technique. Or 117 perhaps they are talking about the time it took designing, writing, 118 testing, and perfecting the scripts and the web pages to handle 119 one-click shopping. That was surely a substantial job. Looking 120 carefully at their words, it seems the “thousands of hours 121 developing” could include either of these two jobs.</p> 122 <p> 123 But the issue here is not about the details in their particular 124 scripts (which they do not release to us) and web pages (which are 125 copyrighted anyway). The issue here is the general idea, and whether 126 Amazon should have a monopoly on that idea.</p> 127 <p> 128 Are you, or I, free to spend the necessary hours writing our own 129 scripts, our own web pages, to provide one-click shopping? Even if we 130 are selling something other than books, are we free to do this? That 131 is the question. Amazon seeks to deny us that freedom, with the eager 132 help of a misguided US government.</p> 133 <p> 134 When Amazon sends out cleverly misleading statements like the one 135 quoted above, it demonstrates something important: they do care what 136 the public thinks of their actions. They must care—they are a 137 retailer. Public disgust can affect their profits.</p> 138 <p> 139 People have pointed out that the problem of software patents is much 140 bigger than Amazon, that other companies might have acted just the 141 same, and that boycotting Amazon won't directly change patent law. Of 142 course, these are all true. But that is no argument against this 143 boycott!</p> 144 <p> 145 If we mount the boycott strongly and lastingly, Amazon may eventually 146 make a concession to end it. And even if they do not, the next 147 company which has an outrageous software patent and considers suing 148 someone will realize there can be a price to pay. They may have 149 second thoughts.</p> 150 <p> 151 The boycott can also indirectly help change patent law—by calling 152 attention to the issue and spreading demand for change. And it is so 153 easy to participate that there is no need to be deterred on that 154 account. If you agree about the issue, why <em>not</em> boycott 155 Amazon?</p> 156 <p> 157 To help spread the word, please put a note about the boycott on your 158 own personal web page, and on institutional pages as well if you can. 159 Make a link to this page; updated information will be placed here.</p> 160 161 <h3 id="whyContinue">Why the Boycott Continues Given that the Suit has 162 Settled</h3> 163 164 <p> 165 Amazon.com reported in March 2002 that it had settled its long-running 166 patent-infringement suit against Barnes & Noble over its 1-Click 167 checkout system. The details of the settlement were not disclosed.</p> 168 169 <p> 170 Since the terms were not disclosed, we have no way of knowing whether this 171 represents a defeat for Amazon such as would justify ending the boycott. 172 Thus, we encourage everyone to continue the boycott.</p> 173 174 <h3 id="Updates">Updates and Links</h3> 175 176 <p> 177 In this section, we list updates and links about issues related to 178 Amazon.com, their business practices, and stories related to the boycott. 179 New information is added to the bottom of this section.</p> 180 181 <p> 182 Tim O'Reilly has sent Amazon an 183 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20131114095827/http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/ask_tim/2000/amazon_patent.html">open 184 letter</a> 185 disapproving of the use of this patent, 186 stating the position about as forcefully as possible given an 187 unwillingness to stop doing business with them.</p> 188 189 <p> 190 <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard M. Stallman</a> has written a 191 <a href="/philosophy/amazon-rms-tim.html">letter to Tim O'Reilly</a> 192 in regard to the statement by Jeff Bezos, <abbr title="Chief 193 Executive Officer">CEO</abbr> of Amazon, which called for software 194 patents to last just 3 or 5 years.</p> 195 196 <p> 197 Paul Barton-Davis 198 <a href="mailto:pbd@op.net"><pbd@op.net></a>, 199 one of the founding programmers 200 at Amazon, <a href="http://www.equalarea.com/paul/amazon-1click.html">writes</a> 201 about the Amazon Boycott.</p> 202 203 <p> 204 Nat Friedman wrote in with an 205 <a href="/philosophy/amazon-nat.html">Amazon Boycott success story</a>.</p> 206 207 <p> 208 On the side, Amazon is doing 209 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20140610154715/http://www.salon.com/1999/10/28/amazon_3/">other 210 obnoxious things</a> in another courtroom, too.</p> 211 212 <p> 213 See <a 214 href="https://endsoftpatents.org">endsoftpatents.org</a> for 215 more information about the broader issue of 216 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20150329143651/http://progfree.org/Patents/patents.html"> 217 software patents</a>.</p> 218 219 <p> 220 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20010430183216/http://www.cpsr.org/links/bookstore/"> 221 Computer Professionals for 222 Social Responsibility have dropped their affiliation with Amazon</a>.</p> 223 </div> 224 225 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> 226 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> 227 <div id="footer" role="contentinfo"> 228 <div class="unprintable"> 229 230 <p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to 231 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. 232 There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> 233 the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent 234 to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> 235 236 <p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, 237 replace it with the translation of these two: 238 239 We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality 240 translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. 241 Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard 242 to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> 243 <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> 244 245 <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of 246 our web pages, see <a 247 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations 248 README</a>. --> 249 Please see the <a 250 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations 251 README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations 252 of this article.</p> 253 </div> 254 255 <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to 256 files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should 257 be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this 258 without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. 259 Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the 260 document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the 261 document was modified, or published. 262 263 If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. 264 Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying 265 years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable 266 year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including 267 being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). 268 269 There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers 270 Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> 271 272 <p>Copyright © 1999, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p> 273 274 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" 275 href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative 276 Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> 277 278 <!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> 279 280 <p class="unprintable">Updated: 281 <!-- timestamp start --> 282 $Date: 2021/09/02 08:55:39 $ 283 <!-- timestamp end --> 284 </p> 285 </div> 286 </div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> 287 </body> 288 </html>