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.

Comments

Does this preclude the...

[polv0]

Click, ponder, drag, click again?
Click, click... pirouette, double-click, sashay?
Triple-click, behind the back, no-look double-pump click?

Re:Does this preclude the...

[FireballFreddy]

I'm going to patent click-bang-thud technology.

Just so you know, the click is releasing the safety on a pistol aimed at the patent officer who approves these idiotic Amazon patents. You can probably figure out the rest. ;)

-FF

Instant Message Patent--Zephyr

[tmhsiao]

I'm not sure how AOL's patent application is worded, but if they specifically mention a windowed environment, MIT's Zephyr system operates under X.

Re:Instant Message Patent--Zephyr

[MosesJones]

talk, wall etc were all in non-windowed. xtalk and lots of others were windows. The "unique" element is being able to see who is online before you talk to them.

We used to achieve this by use of the advanced commands

"who" which gave you a list of who was on the server. This refreshed every few minutes (sys admins didn't like the number being too low) then you could just use write. Everyone specified a write terminal and you just used that.

Now when we got TWO servers we had to modify the script to use rwho and unfortunately there wasn't an rwrite (is there now?) which was okay because we got X displays anyway.

So in X you start ONE instance of the application, and when people log-on you send a request to the main server (i.e. you send a special email) which fires up a window on your display. The email contained the name of the person, you could then do lots of things including writing to each other.

Oh and the application was called Emacs and we were trying to do a group project.

Pity we didn't realise that we could patent "Open on New Display".

So if its single server using thin clients then there is lots of prior art, if its multiple applications being aware when new people join there is, for me, and even better one.

Jini is all about joining federations, annoucing you are there, requesting services, starting conversations et al. This is surely proof that it fails the "not obvious" test as someone has written a whole environment that can do, in effect, IM between people, computers, printers, machines, PDAs etc etc etc.

I've now just decided to patent syntax highlighting.

Next week on Slashdot:

[Randolpho]

AOL Patents "0-click" spam reception technique.

We at AOL want you to not have to do *anything* to receive spam.

Re:Next week on Slashdot:

[The_Shadows]

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!

Grandma

[Trusty Penfold]

When I go shopping for my dear old grandma I use 2 carts, one for me and one for granny.

However, my grandma isn't called Johnny, so this probably doesn't count.

Prior Art for Instant Messaging!

[Doodhwala]

Here is a slightly modified text of an email I sent to the author of the news.com article on AOL's patent on IM.

FYI, with regards to this article, I don't know how strong this patent is because of existing prior art. If you look at this article in MIT's Technology Review, you will see that a form of IM called zephyr with buddy lists as well as chat-room style broadcasts existed since 1988. It would be great if you could also post this information in a future update to let everyone know.

Zephyr exists till today (and we here at Carnegie Mellon as well as students at MIT) use it on a daily basis. Even emacs supports zephyr :)

Re:Prior Art for Instant Messaging!

[elmegil]

AOL was founded in 1986. They have a reasonable possibility of being able to claim that they came up with the idea before 1988. Likely true? I doubt it. But Zephyr is not obviously prior art as you seem to think.

Re:Prior Art for Instant Messaging!

[farnsworth]

Even emacs supports zephyr

Couldn't the USPTO application process be simplified by consulting the emacs docs for every single patent application? If emacs can't do whatever the patent is for, it's practically a certainty that the idea is new.

Re:Prior Art for Instant Messaging!

[dh003i]

Simply "coming up with an idea" does not count. Zephyr was actually existed in 1988. AOL's instant messenger came out quite some time later.

What matters is the actual creation of the thing. Anyone can have an "idea".

AOL's patent claims are, of course, absurd. Any patent claims on such an obvious functionality as the basic IM features is absurd. What they want is the right to retroactively stop all other IM services to fill their coffers with $$$.

patent prior art?

[Quasar1999]

will someone hurry up and patent spamming? And then sue the bastards for royalty? that should put an end to it... If these stupid people at amazon get away with their patent, we have a strong case for the spamming patent, sure it's been done before, sure it's done by most everyone, sure they didn't enforce their IP... I still want the patent dang it!

New patent

[GMontag]

Okay, I have had enough, I am going to patent the "one finger response" to the ignorance lawyers can invent, only to be eclipsed by the ignorance government can dispense.

I will own all of you

[teamhasnoi]

I have patented the "Random Number of Increasing Intensity Clicks" that occurs when a program locks up.

You know, just a couple at first, then as realization dawns, a flurry of hammers upon the mouse!

No! You infernal machine!*click* *Click*

You *CLICK* WILL *CLICK CLICK* PAAAAAAAYYYY!

*CLICK CLICK* CLICK *CLICK CLICK CLICK* AHHHHHHHH!

I'd like to thank Microsoft for giving me the idea...grr

In European Onion

[Anne Thwacks]

In Europe, I am pretty sure that this is not patentable. (No software patents, no patents on business methods)

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?

And I shall file...

[wowbagger]

And I shall file a patent on:

"A method, given an N-click shopping method, to convert it into an N+1 click shopping method."

Thus, I shall be able to stymie Amazon's 3, 4, 5 ... click patents!

MWHAHAHAHAH!

Re:And I shall file...

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately they own the N=1 patent. In order to show your mathematical induction for the N->N+1, you'll need that. :(

Alright I'm getting ahead of the game.

[unformed]

I'm 3-click shopping where the first click selects the shopping cart, the second click selects the credit card you want to pay with (for all the poor-ass people like me who need to spread out their bills over multiple cards) and the third click will order the item!

Woohoo! No more multiple credit cards for me, time to sue people and make money!

Already Been Thought of, Still Patentable?

[DrMaurer]

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.

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 /msg in IRC could be considered prior art, or the "net send" command.

I don't have the whole answer

[ACNeal]

But there needs to be some sort of punitive damages assesed against ridiculous patents. Make it a civil tort to file unenforcable patents: overly broad, prior art, or obvious.

The burden of searching for prior art should be on the applicant. We wouldn't simply take their word for it, but hold them accountable. If the prior art was easy enough to find, make it a punitive civil matter. And this is a perfect place for a jury, since John Q. Basementinventor has a little less resources to investigate prior art than someone like Amazon.

Obviously this is fraught with more problems than the actual USPTO, but the idea is there. Somthing (like money, or the fear of losing it) to keep people from filing all these frivilous patents.

Re:AOL Prior Art

[operagost]

PHONE has been in VMS since DECNET appeared. That would have to be the mid-1970's. It has a split screen with the caller on the top and the recipient on the bottom. Even cooler was the ability to call a third person (maybe more, never tried it). It was a lot easier than trying to set up a chat room on AIM!

I do also remember using "write" on Xenix. That was annoying, we pretty much all had "write n" in out .login.

Obfuscation

[jdludlow]

Claim #29 is patently rediculous. (har har)

29. A computer system for conducting electronic commerce, comprising: a data component for storing information relating to a plurality of electronic commerce contexts for a user, the information relating to electronic commerce conducted while in that electronic commerce context; a component that receives from the user a selection of one of the plurality of electronic commerce contexts; and a component that, after receiving the selection of the one of the plurality of electronic commerce contexts, conducts electronic commerce with the user and stores information relating to the conducted electronic commerce in association with the selected electronic commerce context.

They are obviously trying to confuse a non-technical reader (like, say, someone in the patent office). All these words to say that you get to click on one of your shopping carts to check-out.

They can't even say "shopping cart". It's the all important, and brand new, "electronic commerce context." Ooooo.

The page you made..

[borkus]

...for your spouse, your kids and your dog.

Multiple carts lets Amazon refine its recommendations engine. Before, if you bought something as a gift, it drove your recommendations, even if it wasn't something you personally would want. Now, Amazon can generate recommendations for other people based on what you buy them or even add to their cart.

Electronic world imitating real world

[dagg]

I just got back home from Walmart. Don't go there until around mid-January (after everyone brings back all their gifts) if you can avoid it.

Anyways, I saw several people with more than one shopping cart. They were hauling two shopping carts around the store, barely fitting through the aisles. The two shopping carts were necessary because they were purchasing gifts for several people in their households. The gifts were large. Upon closer inspection, it appeared that one shopping cart was for girls (everything was pink, such as Barbie dolls), and the other one was for an adult (a BBQ grill).

There ya go, Walmart customer #98981663711 is what inspired this lunacy. Or maybe that customer got the idea from those genious Amazon'ians ?

Using the Get Smart model?

[dr_dank]

Amazon: At this very moment, we have teams of lawyers working on patenting our one click buying technology.

*silence*

Would you believe two click buying?

*silence*

Would you believe five clicks and and clack?

Perhaps I should patent the way I sit on the couch

[Slashdot Junky]

Dear world,

Perhaps I should apply for the way I sit on the couch. You know leaning to one side with one leg up on the ottoman. I could then sue anyone who sits in anyway similar.

Patents shouldn't be granted for such general and vague concepts, period. Greed. Greed. Greed. Can we all say greed?

-Slashdot Junky

Covering their butts

[GeckoFood]

Amazon is playing smart, I think.

Not too terribly long ago I read about some guy that is a patent lawyer that is going around patenting processes that the actual inventors have not bothered to file patents on, and then demanding license and royalty fees. eBay is one of his targets, and he patented their process of concluding auctions in the manner that eBay was doing. (Anybody got a link for that?) Now he's trying to extort from eBay, based on this after-the-fact patent.

If Amazon does not patent this idea, they're likely to have the same kind of crap done to them. 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.

Will they sue others using one-click purchasing? Dunno. That's a different issue.

Re:Covering their butts

[LostCluster]

The patent belongs to whomever invented the thing first, not whomever was the first to pay the fee to the USPTO.The problem is, proving you were first is hard.

If Amazon were to patent everything it does, and then publish the fact that they won't enforce the patents, the would would be a better place.

Re:Perhaps I should patent the way I sit on the co

[YrWrstNtmr]

You know leaning to one side with one leg up on the ottoman.

As a prelude to the 'one cheek sneak'.

Inventive to the max

[billd]

Oh gosh these guys are clever. First one-click shopping, now two-click shopping. What next?