Soverain Software
{{Short description|Commerce technology company}}
Soverain Software LLC was a Chicago-based company which owned patents for its ecommerce technology products. The company held patents for digital shopping carts commonly used on e-commerce websites, such as Amazon.com and collected royalties on these patents, but ultimately their patents were invalidated. Soverain Software has been characterized as a patent troll.{{cite web |url=https://gizmodo.com/soverain-software/ |title=How the "Shopping Cart" Patent Almost Ruined Online Shopping—And How Newegg Beat It |author= Kyle Wagner |date=January 28, 2013 |work=Gizmodo |accessdate=January 29, 2013}}{{cite book |last=Miller |first=Roger LeRoy |title=Business Law Today, Comprehensive: Text and Cases: Diverse, Ethical, Online, and Global Environment |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JXUcCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA150 |accessdate=February 14, 2016 |year=2014 |edition=10th |publisher=South-Western College/West |isbn=978-1285428932 |page=150}}{{cite web |url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/04/shopping-cart-patent-troll-shamelessly-keeps-litigating-and-losing/ |title="Shopping cart" patent troll shamelessly keeps litigating, and losing |author=Joe Mullin |date=April 2, 2015 |work=Ars Technica |accessdate=February 14, 2016}}
Soverain also claimed to own, sell, and maintain an enterprise software product called Transact, which, according to the company, had existed for nearly 18 years and had been used by over 1,000 customers in over 25 countries, including companies such as Time-Warner, AT&T, Sony, Disney, BusinessWeek and Reuters.{{cite web |url=http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/12/12/soverainv-newegg-not-an-ordinary-obviousness-dispute/id=46692/ |title=Soverainv. Newegg: Not an Ordinary Obviousness Dispute |author=Gene Quinn |date=December 12, 2013 |work=IP Watchdog |quote=Despite what you may have heard, this is not an example of a bad patent, nor is it something that wasn't new or was legitimately obvious at the time it was invented, which would have been some meaningful time before October 24, 1994. This is an example of a pioneering invention that came about at the dawn of Internet as we know it today.|accessdate=December 12, 2013}} However, this is disputed,{{cite web |url=http://endsoftpatents.org/2014/04/soverain-software/ |title=Is Soverain Software a patent troll? Yes |date=April 4, 2014 |work=Gizmodo |accessdate=September 19, 2015}} and no evidence that the company ever developed or sold software products is known to exist.
History
In 2003, Soverain Software acquired some of the assets of bankrupt Divine, a Chicago software firm which itself had acquired Open Market, a Boston internet startup, in 2001. Among the assets acquired were the e-commerce software product Transact, and various patents, including patents on the "electronic shopping cart" – essentially, patents on the idea of having a "shopping cart" in which to save items to be purchased in a single transaction, rather than having to purchase each item as an individual transaction.
Soverain did not further develop or market Transact, but instead focusing its business model on enforcing their patents.
= Patent infringement lawsuits =
On January 12, 2004, Soverain sued Amazon.com and Gap Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Gap settled with Soverain in February 2005 under undisclosed terms. In August that year, Amazon settled the case for $40 million.{{cite web|title=Amazon pays $40 million to settle patent dispute|url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/amazon-pays-40-million-to-settle-patent-dispute/|publisher=ZDNet|access-date=28 January 2013}} One of the patents involved a shopping cart mechanism used for online shopping.
In 2010, Soverain Software filed a suit against several e-commerce companies, including Nordstrom, Macy's, Home Depot, Radioshack, Kohl's and Newegg alleging infringement of U.S. Patents No. {{ US patent | 5715314 | 5,715,314 }}, No. {{ US patent | 5909492 | 5,909,492 }} and No. {{ US patent | 7272639 | 7,272,639 }} which relate to the concept of a digital shopping cart, similar to the 2004 case. When the case went to court in 2010, all defendants except Newegg had settled. Initially, Newegg was found to have infringed the patents in suit and Soverain was awarded a judgement of $2.5 million fine instead of the $34 million claimed by Soverain.
On January 22, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and invalidated claims from all three asserted patents as being obvious in view of the prior art. The judgment against Newegg was vacated.[http://www.finnegan.com/Publications/federalcircuit/FCCDetail.aspx?pub=6e270857-0576-4a9b-9417-0c797f634593 In Soverain Software LLC v. Newegg Inc., No. 11-1009 (Fed. Cir. January 22, 2013)]{{cite web|title=Patent Watch: Soverain Software LLC v. Newegg Inc.|url=http://www.bakerlaw.com/alerts/patent-watch-soverain-software-llc-v-newegg-inc-1-23-2013/|accessdate=28 January 2013}}{{cite web|title=Soverain Patents Found Valid and Infringed|url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/soverain-patents-found-valid-and-infringed-101300749.html|publisher=PR Newswire|accessdate=28 January 2013}}{{cite web|title=Sovertain Software LLC v. Newegg Inc.|url=http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/2011-1009.Opinion.1-17-2013.1.PDF|publisher=United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=January 22, 2013}}{{cite web|last=Albanesius|first=Chloe|title=Newegg Crushes Patent Troll in Online 'Shopping Cart' Suit|url=https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2414778,00.asp|publisher=PC Magazine|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=January 28, 2013}} The ruling of invalidity put a stay on the remaining lawsuits in progress.[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/how-newegg-crushed-the-shopping-cart-patent-and-saved-online-retail/ How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail], by Joe Mullin - January 27, 2013, arstechnica.com
On October 16, 2013, Soverain filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in Soverain v. Newegg to request a hearing with the Supreme Court of the United States.
{{cite web
| title=Soverain Petition for Cert.
| url=http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/10/21/news-notes-october-21-2013/id=45759/
| accessdate=20 November 2013}}
Three amicus briefs were filed by i4i, Professor Eileen Herlihy and MDB Capital who supported Soverain's petition.
{{cite web
| title=Soverain amicus briefs
| url=http://www.law360.com/technology/articles/489997/soverain-ruling-threatens-patent-system-high-court-told
| accessdate=20 November 2013}}
On January 13, 2014, The Supreme Court denied the petition.
{{cite web
| title=Internet Patent Owner Loses High Court Bid to Revive Suit
| url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-13/internet-patent-owner-loses-high-court-bid-to-revive-suit.html
| accessdate=13 January 2014}}{{cite web
| title=Supreme Court Order
| url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011314zor_f204.pdf
| accessdate=13 January 2014}}
On February 13, 2015, a U.S. Court of appeals invalidated Soverain's previous victories over Avon and Victoria's Secret.
| title="Shopping cart" patent beaten by Newegg comes back to court, loses again
| url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/shopping-cart-patent-beaten-by-newegg-comes-back-to-court-loses-again/
| accessdate=13 February 2015}} On March 30, 2015, US District Judge Leonard Davis declared invalid the last of Soverain's patents, after which the company had no substantive assets.
See also
References
{{Reflist}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. Nordstrom, Inc.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-nordstrom-l5Ff/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. International Business Machines Corp. et. al.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-international-business-machines-l5F6/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. Oracle Corporation et. al.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-oracle-l5F7/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. Office Depot, Inc.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-office-depot-l5Fh/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. W.W. Grainger, Inc. et. al.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-ww-grainger-l5Fd/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. eBay, Inc. et. al.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-ebay-l5F9/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. Macys, Inc. et. al.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-macys-l5Fe/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. Office Depot, Inc.|url=http://news.priorsmart.com/soverain-software-v-office-depot-l5Fh/|publisher=Priorsmart.com|accessdate=29 January 2013|date=March 14, 2012}}
- {{cite web|title=Soverain Software LLC v. Oracle Corporation et al |url=http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/226.pdf |publisher=Ars Technica |accessdate=13 February 2015 |date=March 30, 2015}}
External links
- [http://www.soverain.com/ Soverain Software homepage]