Then, Amazon sends its neutral patent evaluation agreement to both the patent owner and the offending hacker. The two parties have 21 days to agree on participation in the process by signing the agreement and sending US$4,000 to Amazon. If the hacker does not cooperate, Amazon will simply close its offer. Saying, “If the seller does not comply with the agreement or the seller does not agree to participate in the evaluation process, the offers for the seller`s offending products will be removed from Amazon`s marketplace.” However, I have no doubt that Amazon coincides with the provisions of the agreement that waive the right to sue Amazon independently. The fact is that there may not be a viable alternative to selling on Amazon. And the fact is that a brief glance at a table of claims and a patent that makes your product retired is pretty hard. Intellectual property owners (including patent holders) must Amazon.com carefully monitor counterfeit goods. Product sellers, many of whom depend on the e-commerce platform for their primary source of revenue, also need to guard against possible claims of infringement or risk account closure. Amazon`s process has been specifically designed for small and medium-made rights holders. Otherwise, these small businesses would be hit hard by an average patent action, which can take years and cost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. Instead, this process requires only $4000 (which can be fully refunded to the winner) and takes less than four months from start to finish. There may be a clever use of Amazon`s “terms” to choose, as an option, a seemingly very cheap, quick and “unbiased” rating.
The conditions can even reach a level of illegality (similar to a shrunken film license – although most likely available before opting for the optional program). Thank you for sharing this information. THE UPNEP appears to be a positive step, but it clearly raises a number of issues – including the feasibility of the procedure for the assessor, especially if the parties agree – and other considerations. From the point of view of the patent proprietor, it is good that the validity cannot be assessed in the context of the procedure (which leads to an ramification under the German patent litigation regime); less from the seller`s point of view. I hope that the procedure will be refined and extended to patents outside the United States. .