Slashdot Mirror
Washington Mutual Patents the Bank Branch
ewhac writes "Okay, so it's not a bank branch per se, but a particular kind of bank branch -- one that has play areas for kids, serves coffee and popcorn, and has kiosks instead of teller windows. Washington Mutual has dubbed this branch design, "Occasio" (a generic Latin word meaning, "favorable opportunity," and which has probably been trademarked). The San Francisco Chronicle reports that it may be the first time the USPTO has awarded a patent for the design of a retail store/presence."
I'm actually okay with this one. At least this is a patent on something physical, something that can be built.
A retail layout is more like a device to increase sales, than a business method is.
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
This kind of nonsense will just accelerate the collapse of our intellectual property system. It won't be pretty, but maybe it will actually work if we need to start from scratch.
Patents convert free markets into control economies (fascism). Software patents are a particularly easy target, but actually all patents are pretty unethical and immoral in my book - why the fuck should anyone have a 20-year government-enforced artificial monopoly on the production of anything?
Furniture designers and architects file copyrights on their designs all the time. Wouldn't a copyright for a particular design be more appropriate. They really didn't invent anything new ... Dentists, doctors, DIY stores and fitness centres have been doing this for ages.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Sad, really.
In the UK, the Nationwide(also a mutual) already has coffee and snacks, things to keep kids occupied and anything more complicated than a simple money transfer is carried out with a customer services adviser in a relaxed setting(usually at a table)
why the fuck should anyone have a 20-year government-enforced artificial monopoly on the production of anything?
Well obviously this is intended to encourage research by offering a reward for new ideas, and to give an incentive to companies to release trade secerts. The problem is that patents are awarded for rediculous things (like the layout of a bank). There is no benefit to humanity if 20 years everyone has access to the wonders of washington mutual bank layout. The laws need to be changed to redefine what can and should be patented.
Alternatively, the length of patent protection could be scaled to the relative worth of the patent. Give Washington Mutual half a year for their "wonderful" idea, but if for instance someone comes up with a design for an effective fusion reactor they can have 20-30 years of protection.
The alternative is that monopolies can be formed in areas where no one can replicate the technology (certainly not the bank layout industry, this is just stupid).
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
You've set up a false dichotomy. There are many other ways for inventors to get a reasonable return on investment other than a 20-year monopoly grant that stops anyone else building on their innovation.
Here's one example: how about just giving decent tax breaks for inventors? Of course, businesses _already_ get huge tax breaks just by sorta existing, as far as I can tell, and also only pay the bulk of tax on revenue rather than income, but even so, more tax breaks would work IMHO. If one of the major justifications for patents is to "encourage disclosure of the workings of inventions" (and it is), then just give the tax break anyone registers the designs for their new product (and only give the tax break while the product is on the market...). This would give the advantages of patents (disclosure encouragement, incentives), without the restrictions on everybody else's freedom the current patent system brings!
And I haven't even mentioned the "myth of the lone inventor": Most patents are actually held by huge corporations, who then simply cross-license them with other large corporations to build cosy oligopolies and bar new entrants from the market (that is to say, prevent commoditisation). Patents are really about market control.
The Latin word "occasio" also means 'pretext.'
What you say is true, if properly applied, for widgets or perhaps even drug trials where the profits are realisable in a business time frame.
It is not true for ideas and inventions where the profits may or may not exist and are way off in the future - i.e. those based upon scientific research or artistic endeavors. That is why we have a different model to drive basic research. Believe me, if politicians didn't believe that funding NIH was the only way to cure cancer and prolong their own lives they would not funnel billions into something that gives no campaign contributions.
The problems arise when the two models collide, as they do when we talk about intellectual property. Unfortunately what is good for encouraging better widgets can stifle creativity in science and art and that is not good for profits or humanity...
"Windows"
"Apex"
"Camel"
"Gateway"
There is no shortage of "regular" words that are trademarks in certain industries.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
It just so happens that one of my web hosting customers has a very similar layout, and has had it since before August, 2000 when they registered their domain name through me.
They are a bank, and use electronic tellers (basically an electronic drive thru kiosk) for their tellers, cookies, coffee, lounge areas and toys.
The financial advisors are still at normal desks.
Having the money behind a pheumatic tube does not hurt the throughput any, and is a HUGE cost savings on insurance because there is NO MONEY a wood-be robber can grab. It's all in a locked room. Unless they have trained attack ferrets to go through the tubes... a guy with a gun is only going to get what's in the people's wallets.
The company that was pushing the kiosks came up with the ideas for the layout.
This bank is definately not the first one doing it, nor were they the first customers of the kiosk company.
So there is definately prior art...
Aside from that, the patent is stupid. Someone might make a case for an overall decor style (similar to the Aqua Mac thing, or the iMac format) but the physical placement of furniture and features of the lobby is not something that is inovative and it wasn't new when the patent was filed.
If you read the actual patent, the claims -- especially the one independent claim -- are so poorly written that you would probably need to sit down with a lawyer to figure out how to infringe this patent. The scope of the independent claim is so narrow, it would be hard NOT to design around it, if you wanted to open your own Wa-My like surroundings in your own home.
The only purpose of this patent, as far as I can see, is to show off to the investment community that "hey, we're developing IP assets, our stock should be worth more." This patent is so narrow as to be almost uninfringeable, and was probably written that way specifically because there is so much prior art out there.
While the "one-click" patent, and a lot of biotech patents, may very well be a sign that the USPTO is going crazy, this patent certainly isn't. It's worthless, so why not grant it -- the fees they pay can be used to examine some really good patents...
"That's not even wrong..." -- Wolfgang Pauli
As one of the droids that installs the servers (OS/2, yay!) and teller tower workstations (XP, locked down within an inch of its life) just let me opine that the primary advantage of the new WaMu Occasio branch design is that the money is just about nowhere to be found. You hand over your cash to the teller and it disappears into a slot just like a Reno blackjack dealer. You won't be changing your mind after that. To get your withdrawl money after your transaction with the teller, you amble over to a large vault on the floor, swipe your card, enter your pin and then the cash spits out into your hands. The tellers never have any money!
We had some clown try to stick up one of the branches here in Seattle and after he finally figured out that there just wasn't any money around to take, all he ever got was some heavy attention from the local constabulary who nabbed him down the road after he tried to hit up some other bank.
I'm guessing that the "unrobbability" is the pantentable part of all this, but I could be wrong. What do I know -- I don't explain'em, I just install'em. And from a geeks point of view, they are clean designs. And having a safe place to stash the rugrat for ten minutes ain't bad either, lemme tellya!
Just yesterday there was a WSJ (printed version) article describing a trend where high-end tax dodge specialist are patenting particular and specific tax strategies taylored for wealthy clients!
What is good about this is that we are now entering into the ludacris stage of the current fashion of patenting everything that walks - which means reform will be close at hand - or at least I hope.
My wife's ecommerce store has a shopping cart that gives 5% discount if the customer just happens to be using a Mozilla browser. Maybe she should apply for a patent will she still can...
It's not solid evidence, but the bank was Abbey National and there's an old mailing list archive from November 2000 mentioning it here.
A better source I've Googled up from way back in June 2000 (18 months before this patent) is here. It talks about Abbey planning to open banks containing franchised cafes and internet banking kiosks as well as clearly showing a picture of a children's play area. I think that pretty much covers the washington patnet.
There are some excerpts here from 2000 too, if you scroll down a bit.
Can you give me the URL of your article, I'd be interested to read it - if you need any more links I can do some more digging but I think that BBC article is fairly comprehensive.