Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Releases 1-Click Patent Sequel
theodp writes "Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is seeking a patent for coordinating the delivery of a gift. The invention was bundled with the 1-Click claims in this 1998 EPO filing, but its USPTO filing was allowed to lapse. Amazon refiled with the USPTO in July, 2002--a few months after settling the BN 1-Click lawsuit." Update: 12/13 05:35 GMT by T : Ben Silverman writes "Please note that Shel Kaphan is no longer the CTO of Amazon.com and has not been with the company for over three years. I apologize for any inconvience this has caused Mr. Kaphan and to readers for the error. Mr. Kaphan pointed out my error in an email this evening." (Kaphan is identified as CTO in the linked NY Post story.)
Oh shit--Amazon just patented Christmas.
Um.... I thought Santa or at the very least the Grinch would be prior art on this.
Ted
Fantasy remains a human right; we make in our measure and in our derivative mode... -- JRR Tolkien
Amazon has already proven that it has no intentions to resist patent abuse in its own camp.
Continue the boycott. Spread it to your neighbors and friends. That's the only currency Bezos and other megacorp CEOs understand; the bottom line.
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
They should patent how to never make money and stay in business. That's their big secret...
Amazon files patent on reading books while taking a dump.
.... of Preorders. I stopped doing business with Amazon just over a year ago, when 3 seperate pre-orders I had placed didn't ship on time.
One of my stronger Geek attributes is I like to have certain things on Release day. A year or so ago, I was even willing to order on line and pay next day shipping to do so. We're talking a few movies here and there, and a couple of games. Geek stuff.
Roughly 12 months ago, the formerly reliable Amazon completely lost the ability to ship these preorders on the release date (or in some cases to arrive on the release date). This was rare before that point. In the rare instance that they would slip up, they would comp the shipping (after all I'm not paying next day so I can get the item a week later). Once this chronic problem turned up, they stopped making any sort of amends whatsoever.
Amazon has not seen dime one from me since that time, and will not in the future. I spent a LARGE amount of money with them prior to that.
I'm a bit amused to see a buy.com banner as I type this, as they are one of the companies who have gotten business from me since I dropped Amazon from my list. I don't preorder from ANYONE anymore though.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
2. Change in customer info privacy policy
And the straw that broke the camel's back...
3. Charging existing customers higher prices than prospective new customers.
3a. After getting caught at (3) once, and apologizing for it, doing it again.
We used to spend quite a few bucks at Amazon. Haven't bought anything there in quite some time. Have no plans to buy there again.
Well, I can provide "prior art" right off the top of my head - Every retail store in the US has offered a "wedding registry" for longer than I've drawn breath. Unless Amazon (sorry, Bezos and Kaphan, the patent doesn't actually mention Amazon) only wants the *name* "Wish List", they have quite an uphill battle in defending *this* one.
But the more general issue, of contacting the buyer if they didn't provide enough information - I thought the USPTO didn't allow "trivial" patents. Can someone explain how the idea of "you didn't tell me your credit card's expiration date, so I called to get it" doesn't count as trivial?
Absolutely absurd. The USPTO *really* needs to start actually *reading* the applications it approves. And issuing some sort of fines to companies that repeatedly try to push through complete drivel.
As far as I can remember I have not personally bought an item from Amazon since they were given the 1-click patent (actually, I technically think I started my boycott when they actually sued B&N over it).
I've also promoted alternative online retailers such as Buy.com and Fatbrain.com (now B&N) to my coworkers and friends every chance I had. On numerous occasions, this has resulted in at least hundreds of dollars in book purchases that would have otherwise gone to Amazon.com for work going to Fat Brain.
CDNow used to be my #1 stop for CDs. I frequently chose it over all other online retailers, local CD shops, and the big stores such as Best Buy. Quite frankly, they were the ONLY place that always had stocks of the kind of music I listen to which is unfortunately frequently difficult to find in America. The other day, they more or less switched over to Amazon.com with the CDNow logo stapled up front. I will never make another purchase from them again.
I can only hope others are doing the same. For all his talk about wanting to improve the patent system, Jeff Bezos is one of the prime examples of what is wrong with it and he is doing NOTHING to improve it, he is only covering his ass at the expense of others.
Bryan
12 partisan judges
11 lobbiests bribing
10 lawyers lying (IANAL)
9 slashdotted websites
8 "innovations"
7 corrupt senators
6 media magnates
5 bankruptcies
4 corrupt CEOs
3 anti-privacy laws
2 monopolies
and a patent on a pear tree
The basic idea behind this invention is:
You want to give Uncle Jimbo a gift, but don't have his address. Rather than calling Uncle Jimbo, you give Uncle Jimbo's email and/phone number to Amazon. Amazon's automated system, will first email Uncle Jimbo for his address. When that fails, Uncle Jimbo get put on a calling list to get his address.
It's just a superflous system for getting someone's address...
Why not just call Uncle Jimbo yourself, and ask?
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
Just read this last night in Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography, and it really sums up my attitude:
"As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously."
This was after being offered a patent on the Franklin Stove. He basically gave the technology away. Same with the lightning rod.
M@
Krispy Cream is people
When Amazon started that bullcrap, I switched all my online book-ordering to a comptetitor (bamm.com) and badmouthed them to everyone I know, as did many other geeks who were pissed about it. Then, suddenly, everyone forgot about it. Not long after, tons of weblogs once again started sporting Amazon ads on their site (cough*phpnuke*cough) and totally forgot about the patent idiocy.
This patent, too, will soon disapper from the headlines and from the minds of the people not long after.
good, elegant solutions to things like 1-click ordering can be more difficult to produce than it may first appear (emphasis mine)
This is the problem. You're not supposed to get a patent on something because it's hard to make, you're supposed to get a patent on it because it's hard to discover.
Both the 1-click and this are both simple excercises in using technology developed by others to do exactly what the technology was designed for.
Cookies were invented by Netscape. They store information on the client's computer. Basically, Amazon got a patent on using cookies to store information.
Bezos' defense is that "it took them lots of work to make".. well, that's what copyright is for.
Unless Sears had an automated system to email gift recipients to get thier shipping address in the 1800's, then no...
I invite you and others who obviously care about corruption in the patent system, to actually read this patent abstract. You will learn a bit of the terminology, and maybe get a little sense of what can and what can't be patented. I don't expect you guys to become patent attorneys, but if you're going to critisize a patent (let alone the patent system), atleast know what you're critisizing.
This fight to reform the patent system is rooted in influencing enough of the right people who can make the reform happen. In order to influence the people, we need to be well educated and well versed on the subjects. We can't afford these embarassing misconceptions. And I've read a lot of embarassing misconceptions.
How are we going to make everybody else easily understand our problem if we don't even understand our problem?
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
You say that like it's a bad thing. Well, okay, the "derisively" part is, but as for the rest of it
Thomas Jefferson was a liberal. Abraham Lincoln was a liberal. Both Roosevelts were liberals. JFK was a liberal. Bill Clinton -- that's right, the President whose term gave us the longest stretch of peace and prosperity in recent history -- was a liberal. And it's not just Presidents. Benjamin Franklin. Frederick Douglass. Martin Luther King.
I think I'm in pretty good company.
It's time to take back the word "liberal," to make it a term of pride instead of shame. Liberalism is the greatest force for improving the human condition the world has ever known. Conservatism is one of the greatest forces for dragging it down into the much where it's been for most of human history. Which label would you rather wear?
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Want to do something better than writing a letter to your representatives, or boycotting Amazon?
...AND ALWAYS...
1. LEARN as much as you can about the patent system. Learn how to read patent abstracts, how to file a patent, and how patents are processesed.
2. LEARN about as many bogus claims as you can. LEARN EXACTLY why they are bogus.
3. EXPLAIN it to as many people as you can, as economical as you can, without putting them off...
4. Explain it to someone who can explain it back better than you can.
5. Learn how to explain it so well, that person whom you explained it to will want to explain it to someone else as good as you explained it to them.
6. Explain it to Slashdot
6. Explain the TRUTH, not misconceptions and misinformation littered with fallicies.
MOST OF ALL: Do what this post is trying to do. Try to encourage as many people as you can to learn about the causes they care about, rather than just shouting opinions.
You didn't honestly think that people care about your opinions more than thiers?
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
>
> (emphasis mine) Now I don't know about them, but all those years of college physics taught me that unless the wavelength is altered, "invisible" light cannot become "visible," and focusing light doesn't alter its wavelength. Therefore, this patent is impossible to implement, and therefore a waste of cash and ink.
Naw. Infrared light, such as that produced from a CO2 laser, is invisible to the human eye.
So you use a 10W CO2 laser. Believe me, you'll get plenty of light wherever the beam intersects with an opaque surface, and while I'm not convinced that "fascinated" is the right word to use, I can guarantee you that any cats in the vicinity will move very quickly.
(Note: If your cat moves towards the light, you'll need to get a new cat. But think of it as Darwin's way of telling you that you probably needed a new cat anyways.)
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office website will now offer their online shopping cart through amazon.com.
"It's a wonderful development," said the USPTO spokesperson, "we sell all our related law, patent, and trademark texts online. This invaluable partnership will allow our customers to order any of our texts with only 1-click(tm) on amazon.com. And, coming soon, our customers will even be able to send these out as gifts and get their products when their delivery address is not complete! Really, it's an amazing technology!"
Others speculate that USPTO will start out as one of the zShops on amazon.com and move up to the partnership level when their orders reach an adequate number.
Meanwhile, several consumer unions, groups of hackers, mostly terrorists, are crying foul. They allege the patent system in the U.S. has been abused and needs review. These outlaws are somehow trying to link this story with the old and outdated argument that USPTO is too loose on how they grant patents.
In that discussion in a televised interview few years back, Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon, while agreeing that USPTO should be reviewed was seen winking his eye to a patent officer in the audience. The intent from Jeff Bezos was apparently to calm down and feed to the hacker crowd that is known to frequently visit slashdot.org website, now under heavy surveillance from both FBI and the Office of Homeland Security.
you know how amazon has a "if you like this you should also buy..." thing? I was checking on a book earlier this week and that part of the web page read:
Customers who wear clothes also shop for:
Clean Underwear from Amazon's Target Store
Ladybug Rain Boots from Amazon's Nordstrom Store
Arm Warmers from Amazon's Urban Outfitters Store
Cheetah Print Slippers from Amazon's Old Navy Store
?????
Customers who wear clothes? as opposed to? And "Clean Underwear"? I'll pass, but do you have any soiled teenage cheerleader panties? wtf?
Oddly, I wrote the first draft of what became that patent filing at Jeff's behest when I worked at Amazon.com from 1996 to 1997. Can't even recall why I was asked, but following the form of patent applications, I wrote out the ideas. Since I was an employee and not the inventor, I signed over all my rights. I was also under trade secrets restrictions because of my employment agreement.
I always wondered what happened to that patent, and lo and behold, here it is! It's certainly nostagia for me, but I was a pretty naive guy about patents in those days, and I wrote the draft not as a lawyer, but just as a technical guy who understand the mechanisms.
I have a very different opinion of things today, although it was clear at the time I wrote it that what Jeff had come up with was, in fact, unique, original, and significant under the way the law is still interpreted.
Freelance tech journalist for the Economist, MIT Technology Review, Macworld, and others
So during the entire history of mail order since telephones were invented, a company finding that the delivery address given was incomplete and calling either the sender or the receiver to double-check or get directions has never occured and the process is therefore ingenious and patentable? This is stupid beyond the pale. And what's worse is they'll probably win simply because nobody ever thought to document doing something so basic.
Dyolf Knip
So long as they ahve large scale participation. The problem is that somehting like a geek boycott of Amazon.com is nothing. It wasn't organised, at least not on a large scale, and you are dealing with a small percentage of the population anyhow, many who have never used Amazon.com.
However if a large part of the population boycotts a company or product, it will work. A great example is Divx, the DVD alternative from Circut City, not the MPEG-4 knockoff. Divx was an "enhancement" of DVD that was basically pay-per-play DVD. You bought a Divx disc dor like $4 and it was encrypted. Your player would call in and get the key and let you watch it for 40 hours. After that, you had to buy more time if you wanted to play it again.
Ok, so, the movies industry loved this. Some studios decided they'd be ONLY doing Divx releases, no DVD, and many others were committing more titles to Divx or to Divx before DVD. Fine, but the consumers didn't bite. Almost noone bought it because this whole pay-to-play thing wasn't sitting well. There were a number of websites espousing the evils of Divx and so on.
The end result was that Circut City took a bath to the tune of $100 million, the studios backtracked and started supporting DVD, and that's what we have now.
Really, voting with your dollars DOES work.