Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Seeks '2-Click' Shopping Cart Patent
theodp writes "Looks like Amazon's really getting back in the patent game. Today, the USPTO published Amazon's patent application for conducting electronic commerce using multiple shopping carts. Using the invention, a shopper purchasing items for five relatives can set up one shopping cart for each relative, a shopper purchasing books for Johnny can name one of his shopping carts "Johnny's books", and a shopper can add items to multiple shopping carts with only two mouse clicks." This might also be a good time to point out to those who didn't see it the first time AOL's patent claims regarding "Instant Message" technology; you may be able to think of some prior art.
If your server is located in Europe can AOL ask Bush to bomb you for failing to comply with American patents? Even if you are not a muslim?
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
I had this idea when the whole "fiasco" of "Amazon Thinks I'm Gay," and I even posted it on Ars Technica's open forum and (I think) here.
.
/msg in IRC could be considered prior art, or the "net send" command.
Does anyone actually know when an idea like this is patentable? Is it the prototype stage or just when the idea comes and the papers are filed? Could I have actually filed the papers a month ago? Or does the fact that the papers were published today mean that they filed it much longer before I thought of it (1-2 months ago)?
Just wondering, even if justified, I lack the resources to fight such a thing.
I just think having a patent would be kind of cool. Of course, I also spend half my day figuring out how to eliminate my own job at work, so . .
And the IM patent: I wonder of the
Dan
My wife and I go to the supermarket. We each get a cart. We call mine 'groceries', we call hers 'this weekend's picnic'.
At checkout, we charge both carts to my credit card.
Amazon, get real!
there's no place like ~
Failed businessman? How exactly did he fail?
My assumption is that the space and the tech required to pull off amazon.com would be way greater than any other book chain.
With "bulk purchasing discounts" you still need to store the goods, you only save on the real estate of having an actual point of purchase land-space.
To really save on shipping you have to spread the storage facilities out, reducing both the distances pallets travel & the distance a shipment has to go to the customer.
Does the website & crew cost more than renting out a huge shop for each city & crew? I figure the crew does, but does the tech outweigh the POP real-estate?
-- The truth is the only thing that nobody will believe.
Oddly, you may have stumbled on an amazing idea.
If AOL would patent pop-up advertising, it would make all other pop-up ads in violation of patent, and AOL could demand all the money from any spammers who use pop-ups.
Could that work? I mean, IANAL, but that would rock if only AOL could do pop-ups, or at least we'd know that AOL charged an arm and a leg to let anyone else do it.
Next on the list: Flash ads, and e-mail spam!
How about RFC 821, published in Aug 1982, section 3.4 on the SEND command:
SEND <SP> FROM:<reverse-path> <CRLF>
The SEND command requires that the mail data be delivered to the user's terminal. If the user is not active (or not accepting terminal messages) on the host a 450 reply may returned to a RCPT command. The mail transaction is successful if the message is delivered the terminal.
As far as I can tell, no one impliments these commands... but they are in the RFC and they sound a lot like instant messages to me.
No, I don't think they should have to patent their process like that, but if it keeps them from getting sued, they're being smart, not greedy.
You almost have a point there. If they were to license their patents for, say, $1 USD, I'd tend to agree with you. However, they not only patent their ideas, they turn around and sue those who are infringing on their IP. They're not just "covering their butts." They're either trying to maintain a "competitive advantage" or exploit a new "revenue stream."