posted on February 14, 2002 05:46:49 PM new
This wont shut Paypal down Cert co is aparently another money hungry group who don't know how to quite while they are ahead.
Paypal has been running with this software two years before there was any such patent possibly even before for there was any cert co to patent any such software.
it will slow paypals IPO down just long enough for them to fix some of the other problems that have been pointed out.
how the hell can you be useing pattented software illegally for which no patent exsited for and if they had a problem with paypal and the technologoy it was useing why wait 4 years after they are perpareing a public offering to sue over it.
something about this rings like cert co is a company in trouble and they think this might be a great way to get there name in the lime light for a bit in hopes of boosting there own name and profit.
posted on February 14, 2002 05:51:54 PM new
Is it panic time yet? Paypal had the market cornered in this online payment thingy. Yet they've managed to p**s off a lot of people -- including their own customers. If I were Paypal, I will provide the BEST customer service in the industry -- then at least I will have a core following. When the courts shut me down, I will open PayFriend.com and still have all my previous customers.
posted on February 14, 2002 06:17:00 PM new
I would say its not time to panic at all Look at it this way Pay pal has been useing this technology for two years before it was patented.
even if they were to win some settlement paypal has used and improved this software in the years they have used it they would be owed money in the end for all upgrades and improvements over the time since 1998 when they started useing it.
no one can see inside paypals system they have no Idea if this technology even is theirs could be its been so upgraded and improved and bugs fixed that its not even the same program any longer.
posted on February 14, 2002 06:45:57 PM new
Well, I am not one to easily panic, but if they could be shut down, that could mean that any money could be tied up. Glad I have decided to keep less than $100 in my account at all times. Maybe I should reduce that to $50 and sweep it to my checking account on a more regular basis?
posted on February 14, 2002 06:46:51 PM new
I seriously doubt a judge will make Paypal stop doing business.
Certco's "Patent 150" (Patent 6,029,150) is very broad and will not be upheld in court. The patent (applied for 10/4/1996 and granted 2/22/2000) says that Certco invented the idea that people can send small payments over the internet.
C2it, Billpoint, etc. are also in violation of Patent 150. Also included are Yahoo's Billpay, Wells Fargo's Billpay (I use these 2) and other banks that offers electric payment.
Patents are often issued by a clueless Patent Department and then overturned by courts.
Remember, there is a company that has been issued THE patent for doing business over the internet. This patent is unenforceable, even though it was legally issued.
If you believe patents should always be honored and if you are not a hypocrite, you must return any money made via Ebay or any internet enterprise. You are in violation of patent law.
As one article said, "Lawsuits are often initiated right before an IPO, as that is the time most companies are likely to settle."
This is just a phase of the IPO where lawyers get to make some extra money.
posted on February 14, 2002 06:59:18 PM new
I just remembered another fun patent:
British Telecom owns the patent for hyperlinking. This is where you can click on a word and it will take you to another web page.
That's right, Ebay is in violation of this patent, as is Auction watch. In fact, any web site where you don't have to write the whole web address manually at the top to go to another web page is in violation of British Telecom's patent.
A lot of patents have been issued. Tumbleweed communications also claims Paypal is in violation of 2 of its patents.
posted on February 14, 2002 07:23:23 PM new
By the way, British Telecom's suit against Prodigy goes back to court next week in White Plains, New York.
If they win, all ISP's will have to license hyperlinking from BT. Even at 1/10 cent per hyperlink processed, we can expect to start paying $200-$300 per month for our internet connections.
posted on February 14, 2002 07:47:44 PM new
The patent is the LEAST of Paypal.com's worries...
Even if they get licensed in each state then they would then become subject to regulation. It is the future regulation that the states are looking for and will implement. I say it's about time.
Can they afford to pay out for legal fees, and arbitration, licensings, regulation compliance, etc? This on a company that has never broken even has lost 230+ million dollars and continues to lose money.
This has all the makings of another internet company going down. Those that think Paypal.com is invincible better thing twice.
posted on February 14, 2002 08:38:45 PM new
Paypal is in trouble and several additional lawsuits are in the works including a large class action. Paypal has chosen to treat its customers badly and has made it easy for scams to be run under the guise of "verified" sellers and buyers in which customers can attach "unverified" credit cards with name and address info that doesn't match the information for the verified account holder. What does the management think will happen when you freeze thousands of dollars in accounts and provide no proof of fraud and in some cases leave the funds frozen in the account for months under the guise of "fradulent funds" even though it is obvious that the allegation of fraud must be inconclusive because the funds have not been returned to anyone and the seller is often left with goods already shipped and no recourse to recover funds if Paypal decides not to except proof of shipment.
posted on February 14, 2002 08:47:11 PM new
Do you think they will let you empty your account? I hope you don't have more than a few hundred dollars in it. They just might restrict your account and place it under investigation. If you do have a frozen account the best thing you can do is enable the money market feature and accumulate interest and if they involuntarily redeem the shares held in your name you then have a legal case against them and file a case against them just like a regular broker.
posted on February 15, 2002 01:46:26 AM new
Hi guys:
I'm new here, but I do about 5-6K in PayPal per month. I ALWAYS suck it out as fast as I get it - within 5 minutes or so.
Why is everyone keeping money in PayPal for rediculous interest rates anyways? Not to mention they aren't FDIC insured. Get an account at ING Direct and pull 3.5% on your money and have it backed by FDIC.
Also in my opinion the PayPal Debit card / low fee crap is just that... crap. Those are my 2 cents.
If PayPal did go under - so what. All I'd be out would be the money currently in transit (if even that).
posted on February 15, 2002 04:06:53 AM new
The patent case is a joke....and should be quickly thrown out as one. It is being used solely for greed.
The states asking for a banking license, what is the big deal. Our country wasn't ready for all the new technology/practices that came out of the internet. The regulations are just beginning to catch up.
Like someone said all these law suits are due to "poor" customer service. I have been a user of paypal for almost (in May) two years. I have had customer service issues, that I have had to email them about and others I felt more comfortable phoning them about. I have to honestly say I got better service from paypal, then I do from collecting child support from my ex through the Dept of Social Services - Dept Of Child Support Enforcement. And hey, aren't they regulated by the state/federal government?
Customer service is an issue with every company that offers customer service out there. Credit card companies, Walmart, eBay sellers, etc. Some companies have been able to work through CS issues and come out the better. I think paypal is overloaded on CS issues, due to a number of people not be internet savy enough and locking up valuable time and "Customer Service Representatives" tolerance. I worked in CS for a number of years with a number of different companies, and it was a stressful job. People asking questions and NOT accepting truthful answer. Keeping me on the phone for an hour (when I worked for Fredericks of Hollywood CS) because they insist that they are a size six and they just know that our sizes/measurements are incorrect, instead of accepting that maybe they need to move to a size 8 instead.
And yes, there are some legitimate claims. No company is prefect. Many of these claims, Paypal seems to be doing what they can. People cry foul when an account is locked due to them violating the TOS, but don't want to take the steps required to reinstate themselves. Or they are involved in case where fraud is suspected. But low and behold, they want their money fruad or not.
as far as the statement of Paypal debit card being a joke. I love mine. I know why Paypal offers it. So the money is more likely to stay in the account, so they can earn interest on it. No big deal with me. If someone thinks it is joke (and they use paypal), I offer them to see how much they pay on paypal fees a month (or a week if a bigger seller) and divide that in half. Would you of liked to make that in profit? Or would you rather give it to someone else? It may not effect the small sellers so much, but the medium and larger sellers, it makes a big difference.
No company or person is without problems at one time or another, quit trying to make paypal way. Problems get fixed, and new problems happen, and they to will be fixed.
posted on February 15, 2002 05:13:01 AM new
No company is perfect but Paypal pretends to be a bank and doesn't offer the protection of one. The idea that the law hasn't caught up with the internet is just an excuse to take advantage of consumers. Money is money and the same laws that apply to money in a bank should apply to Paypal. Paypal has referred to its customers with disdain as a bunch of "sqeaky wheels". My question is, who wouldn't be squeaking if a bank locked up your money for 6 months without any kind of court order or police action, and refused to give a person a clue as to why except that "suspicious activity occurred" or that the were the recipiant of "suspected fraudulent funds". Fraudulent what? Also Paypal labels users as "Verified" and then lets them easily add credit cards to there accounts that are not their own, where the name and address do not cross-check, and then cries about the amount of fraud and the angry sellers who get hit by it after finding out the "fine print" which eliminates them from any kind of chargeback protection. Paypal is a great idea, I used to love using the service but not anymore.
posted on February 15, 2002 05:59:11 AM new
I expect only so much protection from others. Mainly I count on myself to protect myself. I use a lot of commen sense in sending and receiving. have yet to have a problem in my accounts.
What I don't understand is - It is obvious that PayPal isn't "regulated" at this point - Correct? Why people expecting them to act as if they are. "Well my bank doesn't do this" or "My bank doesn't do that" Well they aren't regulated/governed like your bank.
"Squeaky Wheels" - I haven't seen this commment, but please direct me too it. I do wonder if it has been taken out of context though. Do you really think they referred to their customers as squeaky wheels, or where they talking about a select number under certain circumstances? I know I have one current customer who I would call a "squeaky wheel". Why? Because after 5 days, they are complaing about not receiving a package from USPS, that was shipped on time (with proof provided to them), is going from Maryland to Washington State, was sent Parcel Post, and is a very over-sized package. I can't say for sure since I haven't seen the statement, but I think that is the kind of customer they are referring to. <b>But I will gladly retract the statement if I am wrong.</b>
This is something new for me - so it isn't true that the credit card billing address when added is checked and verified against the Confirmed shipping address of the sender? This is what I was under the assumption of.
So what is the rest of the fine print? I have read all the fine print, and don't see the conflicting statements
posted on February 15, 2002 03:10:11 PM new
I have to laugh when people point to banks and government regulations as bastions of consumer safety. After having worked for three banks I have just the opposite opinion. First of all most major banks have tons of ticked off customers, especially if they are credit card issuers. They also have lots of clueless CS reps as most companies seem to. And if you think a bank won't freeze your accounts without warning you are really living in a dream world they do it all the time, especially if they suspect fraud or that that they might lose a dime or two. The banking industry is much more adept at spin control than PayPal. Btw, weren't the savings and loans government regulated?
I'm sure PayPal has problems, but I haven't run into them. But I don't sell e-gold or pie in the sky, or keep large sums in my account, or ignore obvious signs of fraudulent transactions. Many of these "horror" stories seem to start with some incredibly foolish move on the part of the "victim."
[ edited by jsbrock on Feb 15, 2002 03:12 PM ]
posted on February 15, 2002 11:00:47 PM new
I don't see any use panicking. Nothing that says a user can't withdraw money; nothing showing that Paypal is operating illegally. Nothing that shows Paypal will go bankrupt because some injuntion.
I have money in a credit union and banks were going after all credit unions saying they were operating unfairly. The credit unions did tighten up a bit who they accepted and life went on. Paypal is already getting licences in some states, they do intend to follow any existing laws.
posted on February 16, 2002 01:42:23 PM new
Thats true, but in the end it all comes down to customer service baybee. They treat everyone like crap and they have the emails you send them outsourced to a company in INDIA! What the frick is going on over there at paypal? I remember 2 years ago it was a great service, I could always talk to a person every time I needed to. Now I don't think there are any people over there, just money hungry robots who have people in other countries answer their email for them!
Down with paypal! I will start my own damn money transfer site! FDIC insured and all!
^Tim ;<
---------
K4H -
#!/usr/bin/perl
open door, "violently";
join ($fist, $larynx);
while ($lifeRemaining > 0)
{if ($veryDefiant) {$sedate;} else {$breakNeck};}
dumpIN_BACK_ALLEY;IN_BACK_ALLEY;
Open Source Killer 4 Hire :>
(IF you must email me send it here : [email protected] REMOVE the NOSPAM if you want it to go through )
posted on February 17, 2002 04:50:00 AM new
Actually palmwire many large companies outsource their CS functions to India these days becuase there is a large pool of highly educated English speaking workers that cost less to employ. Most of the time you would never realize it because even when you speak to them on the phone they affect western accents and names.
The fact? that PayPal has some CS functions in INDIA! (as you put it) only proves that perhaps they are not quite as xenophobic as yourself. The internet is a worldwide medium and PayPal offers its services in numerous countries so it doesn't seem like a shocking indictment that PayPal would contract employees in some of them besides the USA.
[ edited by jsbrock on Feb 17, 2002 04:58 AM ]
posted on February 17, 2002 05:13:59 AM new
Actually outsourcing for CS/ordering for companies is very common.
I can tell you right now, that Frederick's of Hollywood, Paula Young, Chadwick's of Boston, Oreck, Lifestyle Fasinations, Playboy subscription, etc, etc, etc, orders are handled by the same order processing/cs company. I used to work for them. Interesting job, as each phone call was for a different company.
)