Overture sues Google over ad "technology,"

April 6, 2002 9:40 AM

Overture sues Google over ad "technology," saying Overture invented and has patented pay-for-placement on search engines, and Google's AdWords infringes on that. That strikes me as totally nuts -- how are Google ads paid search engine placement in anything but the very broadest terms? Are MeFi's TextAds next? PyRads?
posted by brookish (7 comments total)

No, MeFi textads aren't the same. The suit is over showing certain ads on certain results.

I search for "harcore pancake action" and the ads come up with "Old Plantation Pancake Mix" instead of something entirely irrelevant.
posted by geoff. at 9:52 AM on April 6, 2002

No, it's not against text ads or any other kind of random ad. It's specifically against "listings within search results" -- and the suit is just as much about competition between Overture and Google as the pretext of patent infringement. That "within" may turn out to be the key here. Are Google's ads actually within the search results, or alongside it? There isn't a bid-for-placement mechanism, nor any guarantee of hierarchy.

On the other hand, Google's rich enough, with Yahoo and other deals. They may just pay Overture a license fee to make this dispute go away.
posted by dhartung at 10:24 AM on April 6, 2002

I'm not fond of the idea of allowing patents for business practices. However, if it's going to happen, I wish that the first bank to think of charging ATM fees would patent that business practice and legally prevent all other banks from charging ATM fees. That would make the whole concept worthwhile.
posted by tdismukes at 11:05 AM on April 6, 2002

I wish that the first bank to think of charging ATM fees would patent that business practice and legally prevent all other banks from charging ATM fees.

Wishful thinking. What would happen instead is that every bank would charge the ATM fee, plus a dime or a quarter to send to the patent holder.
posted by kindall at 11:49 AM on April 6, 2002

I dont like the idea of allowing patents for business practices either. This reminds me of the ruckus raised by the open source crowd over Amazon's patent of one click purchase.

The whole area of software patenting is crying out for reform. League for Programming Freedom has some very interesting articles on the subject (including some rather extreme viewpoints).
posted by justlooking at 3:24 PM on April 6, 2002

I would have thought the Mafia had prior art on preferential treatment in exchange for money.

But seriously, why is it possible to get a patent for human behavior?
posted by tommasz at 7:25 PM on April 6, 2002

i wonder why they didnt sue Business.com, their real competitors? Maybe they will next week.
posted by tsarfan at 8:20 PM on April 7, 2002