Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Patents User Viewing Histories
Chris Cleveland writes "Yet another astounding patent from the USPTO. I was browsing the patent database, and discovered that Amazon received a patent today on using customer viewing histories to generate recommendations. If a customer views product A, and then later views product B, and you use that to infer a relationship between A and B, then you've infringed on this patent. This patent is a continuation of an earlier patent (#6,317,722) on using shopping carts to generate recommendations. When will this stupidity end?"
this has been going on for years. These same ideas are used in amaroK, on Audioscrobbler, all over the place. How can they patent something that's been in use for a long time and is probably already patented?
Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
I'm kinda on your side, except that I think software patents would make more sense if they only lasted 4 or 5 years. On a patent like this, where someone would have surely done it in short order if they hadn't done it first, a 20 year patent is rather silly.
The onus is on you (well, on anyone who wants to challenge the patent), then, to provide that prior art.
It will be difficult, I imagine, because Amazon is one of the pioneers of ecommerce, so much of what they have done has been original within the context of the Internet. Many technologies used by Amazon were mimicked by other online retailers, so it ought to be no surprise that there were various examples of it implemented while the patent was pending.
When will this stupidity end?
When you manage to coerce your elected representatives into.. I dunno... representing you?
Because automating a process always makes it "new and novel". People can have babies pretty easily (usually), but you can bet your arse that if I figure out a way to automate it using machinery, I'm going to patent it (that way the Matrix will owe me money).
More concretely, another poster mentioned that all Ford really did was automate the manufacturing process for cars. Are you diminishing his contribution to the industry? Are you suggesting his work wasn't a contribution?
"Stumble before you crawl"
You see, the colonists hated the royalty because they were money without work, and the royalty hated the coonist because they had money buy no culture. The colonist for some reason thought that money made them equal.
So Even though the English crown had funding the Americas, at no small expense, the colonist just wanted to be rid of them. So george, who was a major in America under british rule, and with the platantion inherieted from his father, got a group of equally greedy people together to fight the british. Greed is definitely a good thing.
But when they got the country, they did not trust democracy. The president was elected by the elite of the elite. Only the elite could vote. Men of the wrong color and women, though possible human, could not vote. Too little has changed.
The freedom to persue happiness was a freedom to persue unfettered profit.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
No, of course I wouldn't be so silly as to claim that Henry Ford's work wasn't a contribution to society. His pioneering of the assembly line was, to the best of my knowledge, a new and novel approach to the production of goods.
I will, however, claim that he didn't "automate" jack shit. He didn't have machines doing the work that people used to do, he simply arranged things so that one person did the same thing over and over, all day long.
I'll also claim that your argument is irrelevant. Any way you spin it, taking an established practice and simply implementing it in the programming language of your choice is not "new", "novel", or "innovative". It's simply shifting old ideas to a new platform. Yes, it's important work, and needs to be done, but it's not deserving of a patent.
OK, fine. I'll bite. You're the expert.
Please explain to me how the process of "making product suggestions based on the prior purchasing habits of the customer" is not covered by prior art.
Perhaps it will end when the rest of the world decides that UPSTO has lost all credability and stops honouring its patents?
#include "std_employer_disclaimer.hpp" "Smoke me a kipper... I'll be back for breakfast"-Ace Rimmer
To play the devil's advocate... keep in mind that amazon.com is only acting to protect its interests. If they don't patent all these obvious-sounding business processes, lots of little unknown startups will (1) patent them and then (2) sue deep pocketed firms such as Amazon. It already happens a lot; some nothing company sues Microsoft over some ridiculous patent having to do with hyperlinks in a browser, for example. The best defense is offense in this case. If you were in amazon.com's shoes, you'd probably conclude however relucantly that these actions are absolutely necessary.
The obvious place to end the "madness" is to fix the source of the problem, which is the Patent Office's recognition of business processes as a patentable thing, especially where implemented by software. Patenting a behavior is logically flawed; how long before someone patents making a profit? Where do you draw the line?
Originality of a product idea is one thing; for example, developing a machine which automatically flushes the toilet and does so in a unique and creative way (I'd rather not develop the details actually)--this is probably a reasonable thing to patent. But patenting abstractions like GUI-based book ordering--that's absurd and bound to fail a prior art test, but will encourage lots of frivolous lawsuits and the wasting of the PTO's precious time and resources.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
You don't believe that accomplishing the same thing faster isn't worthy of a patent? Before Visicalc, an account would create a large spreadsheet by hand. Then his boss would say, "what if we sold 3000 units instead of 2800" and the accountant would have to recalculate everything. With a spreadsheet, he enters in one figure and everything is re-calculated in an instant. Why isn't that useful and novel?
Those of us in the field, on the ground, so to speak, will decide whether the USPTO is on crack or not for a particular patent. We will ignore stupid patents approved by idiot government officials, and pay attention to the ones that make sense. This way, the industry can progress at an efficient pace, and we will send a message that the government doesn't own us.
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
Blockbuster was printing "If you liked this, you might also enjoy" on the back of their video tapes years before Amazon existed, which I'm sure was based on the same kind of statistical data. Amazon has no claim here!
Did anyone bother to ask the customers what they want?
I'd wager there to be a great deal of prior art in this particular case, as most any e-commerce site I've ever seen has had links trying to cross sell other, similar products. This is just ridiculous. Someone REALLY needs to stop software patents in US. Maybe we should have a "million geek march" against patents?
Come on now, ever ordered food at McDonalds and been offered "fries with that". You can't patent this!! So, what's the deal now - everything that can be done in real life, then done again on the computer can be patented?
We used to have to write letters, now we type them. Why not patent the process of pushing a key on a keyboard?
Christopher Latham Sholes patented the typewriter in 1868 (reference) - though dead, his family could get very very rich soon, as long as the USPTO can keeps this act going.
"Only victims make excuses" - Bob Dunwoody
Only victims make excuses
This should be modded funny right? Apparently you and the people who modded this up do not understand patents.
/. favorite, Microsoft comes along and patents that... All you have to do is spend several million $ to prove your prior art. Oops...
You're the one that should be modded funny; as in "naive" funny.
If you are amazon and you start doing something, then some company comes along after the fact and patents that... tough tarts, all amazon has to do is claim prior art and that company can sit and spin. No need to get your own patent on it.
If you are xyz and invest a great deal of your assests into R&D, and then, hmmm, let's see, a
Actually, don't get me wrong, this has nothing to do with Microsoft, all I'm illustrating is that a statement like 'claim prior art' is oversimplifying things, as it may actually cost a shitload of cash. This is exactly why it's called patent "portfolio's" now. It's what _every_ reasonable size company does to protect itself.
Seriously, If you think you can protect yourself against patents by proving prior art, you are dillusional. Here's a hint: filing the patent probably cost them $5K. Defending a patent infringment could cost, well, it's hard to say, but it will suffice to say that $5K won't cover lunch...
(disclaimer: I'm not saying this is good; I think it sucks, but it is what you get when you install a system that favors the big guy over the little guy)
I have to concur about their service. I recently mistyped the address on an order for a book that I wanted delivered to an office where I was doing some work at the time. The delivery failed ofcourse. They didn't ask me anything, just told me the address was incorrect and refunded me the full amount INCLUDING postage. Amazon might not be the greatest place on earth but to me that was better service then I'm used to.
:-(
I mostly deal with Amazon.co.uk, and I over the past few years found that their prices are almost always among the lowest I can find. One thing that bugs me is that they haven't set up shop in The Netherlands yet so no free shipping for me
beauty is only a light switch away
Back at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution someone had patented driving machines with belts and wheels... or gears... or the ball bearing... or nuts and bolts... chances are we would still be walking everywhere and electricity would be someting crazy people created using jars of acid...
The kind of obvious stuff that is being patented today is the equivilent of the nuts and bolts kind of stuff back then...
[The Universe] has gone offline.
It's called Corporatism which is a form of Fascism in which large corporations call the shots. In our form of capitalism money doesn't just talk, it swears and curses louder than anyone can imagine. It buys democracy and justice and walks all over any form of decency or common egalitarianism. And it is only going to get worse.
Fortunately this is a patent, not a copyright. It will expire in ~20 years. (I can never recall the rules, but it is 17-20 years depending on a bunch of factors) Most of us are likely to live that long. There is no long history of increasing the length of patent terms over time to keep things patented.
Compare that to copyright. They will last longer than any of us have any hope of living. Everytime they are about to expire they increase the terms, so even things that are "close" to the end of their term are unlikely to get out in our lifetime.
This might or might not be bogus, but at least it will expire and be used by everyone in 20 years.