Lightning Source, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ingram Industries, provides print-on-demand publication of nearly 100,000 books a week, and is the major provider of print-on-demand services for Amazon.com, the web's leading book retailer.

Turns out that inventor and On Demand Machine Corporation founder Harvey Ross, who died in 2002, was granted a 1995 patent for a "System and method of manufacturing a single book copy":

A computer based book manufacturing, distributing and retailing system for the high speed reproduction of a single copy of a book is disclosed. The system is especially adapted for direct consumer sales since the manufacture of a selected book can take place at the point of sale. A master module includes a computer having a database of books to be selected, the books preferably being stored in a digital book-description format. Upon selection of a particular book from the database, a single copy of the book (including the text and a color cover) is printed by means of high speed raster printing engines. The system includes a binder for binding the text pages and the cover into a book.

Or, in three words, "print on demand".

The verdict, issued today, March 3, found that all three defendants had infringed on the Ross patent, and that Lighting Source and Ingram, but not Amazon, had induced the infringement.

Between them, the defendants have pretty deep pockets, such that $15 million, while painful, will not be a major setback.

Ingram spokesperson Keel Hunt, though, says that it's too early to draw any conclusions:

"This does not immediately impact us. We are continuing to service our customers and business partners. We are, of course, disappointed in the decision and plan to appeal."

The bigger potential issue, though, is that some claims in the patent could conceivably be interpreted to cover an even broader range of business models than print-on-demand such as Amazon and Lightning Source engage in. It's too early to tell until the rulings in the case and the case history are published, but based on a surface read of the patent itself, it could conceivably cover any time a book and its cover are stored in a computer and sent directly to the press, regardless of the number of copies. This is a case that printing and office services companies, such as Kinko's and OfficeMax, are going to need to look at closely.

Thanks to Thomas Thomas of GalaxyLibrary for the scoop, via the Ebook Community Yahoo Group, and to Rakesh Ramde of Innovation Management Sciences for his legal insight.