Sears, OfficeMax Agree To Pay In Gift Card Patent Lawsuit

Written by Evan Schuman
January 8th, 2009

Sears and OfficeMax have agreed to settle a lawsuit against them—and several other major retailers, including Walgreens, Barnes & Noble and Aeropostale—as the chains find themselves losing legal challenges to a company with a gift card validation process patent. That vendor argues that almost every retailer today is in violation of its patent if they accept gift cards at their physical stores.

Sears and OfficeMax join TJX and McDonald’s as having settled—or agreed to settle—their roles by agreeing to license the technology from Card Activation Technologies.

The only amount released was associated with the very first settlement—McDonald’s, which paid $45,000. Asked how much Sears and the others have agreed to pay, Card Activation EVP Mike Malet said, “They won’t be McDonald’s numbers, I can promise you that.” He clarified it to mean that the others would pay much more than McDonald’s did.

The Patent itself (click for full text of Patent 6,032,859) was filed in 1996, and it anticipated the next wave of gift card and phone card usage. At the time, the cards were issued for a specific value and then thrown away when emptied. The Patent envisioned POS units that could add and deduct value. Such POS processes are commonplace today, and therein lies the Patent infringement issue.

The vendor has sent out almost 500 letters to other potential retail defendants and, according to Card Activation attorney Mark Roth, that’s only the beginning.

“We’re going to be taking this to numerous other retailers,” he said. “The more we dig into it, the more people we find who infringe, everyone from golf courses to universities to mom-and-pop operations that have two stores.”

To be immune from the Patent infringement claim, Roth said, a retailer would have to limit its gift card operations entirely to online. If either end of the process—the gift card being created and issued and the gift card being authenticated and having its value changed—happens inside and uses a counter-top terminal or a kiosk, the Patent is violated, Roth said.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.