Slashdot Mirror
Reminding Customers Patented by Amazon
theodp writes "When your little Hogwart checks out the latest Harry Potter book at Amazon, he or she may be reminded that they've already ordered the book. It's all part of CEO Jeff Bezos latest patent for the Contextual presentation of information about related orders during browsing of an electronic catalog, which also covers warning customers about drug interactions ('you previously purchased Drug ABC'). The USPTO allowed the patent after four years and five rejections."
And considering all the money spent on lawyers to go back and forth 5 times, answering the patent examiner's objections, could have bought off at least one senator, maybe two. Could have bought a handful of congressmen. Multiply his filing and lawyer fees by all the patents he's gobbled up like some braying pacman, and you've got enough lobbyist money to get some real patent reform, the lack of which is the reason behind his defensive patents.
Start a happiness pandemic
Appeal
v.t. In law, to put the dice into the box for another throw.
stupid patent... keep counting
Soon, Amazon will patent the ordering of products via the internet.
Relations in database do this kind of things all the time, and warn users about the consequences (usually blocking it completely).
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
No one will remember to pick up the toilet paper!!
Stupid patents like that are the reason why I boycot amazon.
I use ist to look for books or movies, I read the reviews, then I buy somewhere else.
Sorry if anybody here works for Amazon. It's nothing personal.
I don't need a signature.
Jeff Bezos has to start reminding his customers that he owns patents on them
In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
So it's like:
1. Submit patent -> gets rejected.
2. Change a word and resubmit -> gets rejected.
3. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected
4. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected
5. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected
6. Change another word and resubmit -> gets ACCEPTED.
Instead of:
1. Submit patent -> gets rejected.
2. Change a word and resubmit -> gets rejected and submitter faces a small fine.
3. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected and submitter faces a multiplying fine.
4,5,6,7...on the scheme of 3. etc.
Amazon is just flooding the USPO.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Appeal is an intransitive verb. Your definition is spot on however.
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
I'd like to see them patent shipping something out on time. I ordered a phone from them, which they said was in stock. I have checked status and the expected delivery date is August 1st....mind you I ordered this a week ago.
C'mon, how about customer service? Must we rely on computers to do everything?
By spending on R&D they help push the boundries of possibilities(TM)
Perhaps someone ought to patent patent lawyers
"A process of describing ambiguously the obvious"
Just give me Jeff's address. Ill take care of it
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
You would think that after five rejections, the patent office would lend significantly less weight to the credibility of the patent, and presumably would not approve it.
For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.
What happened to the yesteryear of well thought /. posts? This place has caught the DailyKos/LGF emotion over thinking meme. It's no wonder Maddox and Kottke are thinking that blogs are starting to suck ass.
1. Submit patent -> gets rejected. 2. Change a word and resubmit -> gets rejected. 3. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected 4. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected 5. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected 6. Change another word and resubmit -> gets ACCEPTED. 7. ??? 8. Profit!
When your little Hogwart checks out the latest Harry Potter book at Amazon, he or she may be reminded...
Isn't Hogwart the name of the school? What the heck would a little Hogwart be? Can any of you little Slashdots explain this to me?
that the Framers of the U.S. Constitution had in mind when they laid the groundwork for the Patent Office in Article I, clause 8 of that Holy and Magnificent document.
I dare say this beautifully written patent typifies and exemplifies Their intentions. In fact, Their prescience in creating a way for this magnificent patent to be granted shows just how insightful They were.
Moreover, this patent is probably why They wrote the Constitution. The Revolutionary War, and all wars thereafter, have clearly paved the way for the issuance of this fine piece of work. The preamble to the Constitution:
Now, obviously it speaks directly to the issues surrounding this sensible and vital patent. Whether this important patent is the basis for our nation or not, I'm sure my fellow citizens will all agree that the US Patent and Trademark Office has now fulfilled their mission and can close up shop.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
$patent ~= s/$word/$new_word/g
resubmit
}
There, much more efficient.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
I'm not defending Amazon's patents on things that seem obvious (once you start running a service business over the web) --- but they offered a bounty for prior art on "One Click" (TM), in an attempt to establish if their claims had merit. This was done with O'Reilly -- the book publisher.
It seemed to me, based on the results they got, that it actually was somewhat novel. It hadn't been done before.
This one is a bit similar: it seems obvious. But really, I think the problem here is that most ordering systems totally suck, and this is a version that sucks slightly less. So it seems obvious and intuitive. But that doesn't meant that anyone ever tried to do it properly.
It is a bit like a well-designed product; it is easy to use. But a lot of effort and attempts to make it usable went into it. If you take the time to compare it to the sucky stuff that came before, then you'll probably think it is more novel.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Reckon this time the check attached was big enough... or it didn't bounce.
Even though the software patent law in EU was thrown out a while ago, it doesn't mean that doesn't mean that question of software patents will be gone for ever. This was probably just one battle in a long war for software patents.
The more trival and stupid patents that gets granted in the US the easier it will be to show that software patents are bad, whenever the patent law issue pops up its ugly head the next time.
While american idustry spends their money on patent lawyers and courts, other parts of the world where software or process patents are not allowed can spend their money on product development, giving them a competitive edge.
God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
Yes that's right. Amazon already have in the planning stage a patent for the previously unknown concept of "selling". This unique and freshly invented process involves the exchange of goods for money.
There are also plans in the pipeline for saeveral other uniquie and novel concepts. Expect the following to be taken to the patent stage soon:
-Websites
-The number 5
-Presenting a product to a customer
-Telling people they can buy stuff
-Creating words from symbols known as 'letters'
-Only accepting orders if a payment is made
-Sending out orders in 'boxes', whatever they are
-Inhaling air, and exhaling carbon dioxide
I wish I had the brains of those guys - they am them most cleverest.
7 years now. That's how long it's been since I've purchased anything from Amazon.
7 years Jeff. 7 years of lost revenue that has gone to other companies because of your stubborn insistence on doing crap like this.
My boycott shall continue.
May I suggest some of Amazon's competition?
Barnes and Noble
Buy.com
New Egg
Ebay
Bryan
I know this is a common argument, but what if we applied the same patent rules to Brick and Mortar? Can we restrict people and businesses from using common business practices and logic? I.e. I patent "How may I help you?" as a lead question. Now no one can use that line. I know it is ridiculous.
I am in favor of people protecting their unique inventions and developments, but securing patents for the obvious and mundane is a typical symptom of US litigious culture.
One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
that bezos dude is going to patent "Insertion of small and medim sized irregularly shaped objects via the rectum for the purpose of stimulation of the colon thereby deriving intense pleasure". I don't think anyone will be able to prove prior art either
my grandmothers pharmacist in 1978.
He told me when I tried to pick up her latest prescriptions and some other off the shelf stuff she had ordered - last month your order included XX. This time you bought YY. Your new prescription conflicts with both of these. dont but YY, and dont use XX. Intead here use ZZ.
comment directly in my journal
Instead of opening the comics section of the newspaper, you can instead read the freshly approved patents each morning. Unlike in the newspapers anymore, at least there is plenty of humor in these, and what's even funnier, is that the people who produce this humor are all serious and think they are producing something holy.
Just in a global competitiveness sort of way. The US has shipped most of it's manufacturing abroad, is busy shipping it's IT sector abroad. Allowing the patenting of business processes is I admit rather a bizarre way of pushing the rest of business out of the country but hey, most of the world is poor and could do with the trade.
So it only makes sense that everyone outside the US should help Amazon lock down the US markets by buying stuff from them. They're also pretty cheap for books.
Deleted
What about a patent on technology that aids the act of applying for a patent?
It's effectiveness would be inherently obvious, which is always a nice selling point.
- Donny was a good bowler, and a good man.
They keep electing lawyers. I mean, DOH!
Deleted
The concept of "marking" in soccer wasn't invented/discovered until the 1960s. What would happen if I invented/discovered a new tactic in a highly popular game and patented that? I could legally prevent (for example) the opposing team marking mine in a game of soccer and then my team would always win.
I reckon that's a good way to bring in the stupidities of the patent system to the attention of the wider public. Watch their team crash and burn and all down to the USPTO.
K.
Go to law school and then work for free for RIAA, MPAA, etc.
Evolution of Language Through The Ages: 6000 BC : ungh, grrf, booga 2000 AD : grep, awk, sed
1. Take something that it commonly done (saying "thank you")
2. Add the words "on the Internet"
3. Patent it
4. Profit!
...try, try again.
See. It works!
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Has anyone told WebMD about this? They've been able to do drug interaction screening for YEARS.
So it's like:
1. Submit patent -> gets rejected. Now you can't win if you sue people for that
2. Change a word and resubmit -> gets rejected. Now you can't win if you sue people for that
3. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected Now you can't win if you sue people for that
4. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected Now you can't win if you sue people for that
5. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected Now you can't win if you sue people for that
6. Change another word and resubmit -> gets ACCEPTED. That you can win on if you sue people for it
Claims have legal siginificance. When you amend the claims, you are admitting that you cannot claim what you previously tried to based on the prior art put forth by the examiner. It's like building a fence around your property. Your neighbor says "Hey, your fence is on my property," so you make the fenced in area a little smaller. Your neighbor says the same thing, so you shrink the fence som more. You keep shrinking the fence until your neighbor stops complaining. That becomes the limits of your property. Unless your other neibor on the other side then says "Hey, your fence is on my property." And you can only sue people for trespassing on the fenced in area.
Dear Jeff,
This is just a friendly reminder from the USPTO that you have already tried to submit this patent over five (5) times. This could be an indication that what you trying to patent is completely lacking in innovation or that you are in fact not the first person to come up with this idea. Sometimes, particularly with entirely banal patent submissions, it is a combination of both.
You could check our online FAQ for more information on why your patent keeps getting rejected, or you could just "chill out and get the message finally". If you think you have received this reminder in error, please contact us at priorart@uspto.gov or try submitting the patent again. Its only the taxpayer's money your wasting, after all.
Thanks.
Best Regards,
The Patent Office
What Amazon's case is leading up to is that you can't run a business where you think up new things to get more customers who pay better or other ways to improve business, because pretty soon every smart business technique will be patented if you use any software at all (and don't they all?). They'll use "but it's in software" as an excuse but they're still patenting business methods.
In fact, patenting software is also bad, but since that bad thing has been allowed, it's a good way of getting the other bad thing allowed via this back door.
You think being able to start a business, selling something and making money is something that should be ok for you to do? Not in "their" reality. In their reality any competitor is something bad and needs to be destroyed in any way possible. After all, what's better for profit than having no competitors right? right!
In their reality, the big corporations are the emperors of the business world now and especially in this political climate it looks like it's going to stay this way. They see a world where there will be no more extra competitors incoming anymore and they will be the ones offering most of the goods and services that the people need, the ones they don't need we'll make them want, simple.
HEY, if we make a couple of acquisitions we might be the only company left in the country, won't that be nice? No competition at all, just like "The Company" in the movie "Aliens" although we'll have to somehow make the rest of the world heel to our reality as well, for even more easy profit!
This is the feeling I get when I read news out of the, shall we say, "corporate empires of America". Will it really turn out this way or do you have your own reality of how you see the world, of how you see the world changing in the future? A lot of you do but is your reality as strong as "their" reality? And are you busy making your reality happen or are you just focusing on pointing out the flaws in their plan (which means the only reality under discussion is still THEIR REALITY (there's no such thing as bad publicity eh Mr. Cruise?)).
Take a leaf out of their strategy book: don't waste all your energy on countering their propaganda and instead focus on spreading YOUR ideas into the world, self-replicating memes via the internet work well and don't take much effort except using your brain to come up with the concepts and vectors. Spreading something good instead of reinforcing the bad will improve how you enjoy life as well as how others enjoy it. The main theme of your life will not be negative but positive.
It sounds cloudy but it makes psychological sense.
You could, for example, take the recent rejection of software patents in the EU as something positive. The businesses in Europe will be able to do anything they want to do and in doing so will out-profit USA businesses, especially in an internet world. They'll be able to use any software they want and still sell in the USA, they'll be able to use any business method and still be able to sell in the USA, they'll be able to patent any weird idea in the USA and block out US businesses from competing with them.
Pretty soon, the corporate "emperors" will be left with invisible business suits and somehow "arrange" for the laws to be changed.
That's just a concept, a reality I hastily described during the typing of this post, it could do with some more positivity. Do you like it or would you like to construct one of your own? Be my guest but make it visionary and positive. It'll spread with a little "marketing" and if it's concepts are powerful enough.
How about the concept of changing voting behaviour? Whatever it is that's in your head, start typing.
You don't have a reality of your own? You've been watching a lot of TV haven't you? I pity a lot of North Americans, I wish for something better for them.
Anyway, I want every response to this post to have arguments against OR for this view of mine maybe coupled with how you see things, and not just any argument, it can't be some bullshit argument that just makes you FEEL good even though it doesn't make sense. It has to be a logical argument!
Good luck in making it happen guys!
- -- Truth addict for life.
We are consumers and we have the power of choice.
Boycott companies that abuse our legal system and they will stop.
Put your money where your mouth is. It's the only thing that big business will listen to.
"which also covers warning customers about drug interactions" I just can't wait for the first fatality if anyone implements this. You just know what would happen "But the system usually warns me" followed by "I'm taking you to court" soon after something isn't flagged up or an unusual conflict occurs.
Philip
Signatures are broken
Why should we? According to your site you are psychic.
/still in awe at how this got modded up.
Okay, Jeff Bezos claims he gets these patents defensively to prevent someone else from getting them and suing Amazon. But the effort he goes to in convincing the patent office they're even valid seems enormous.
He didn't use his rediculous "one-click" patent defensively against Barnes and Noble, unless your definition of defense includes either "a good offense" (which is effectively just doublespeak for negating the difference between two antonyms) or "no competition whatsoever," which is today's business monopolist's notion of "a free market."
Either way, Bezos is a despicable, disingenous, antisocial jerk who is working the system to the detriment of the internet, technologists, and the free market.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Hospitals and clinics have had drug interaction warning software for years. It warns doctors about the same thing. In order for Jeffy's idea to be meaningful, a patient would have to have lied to his doctor(s) in order to get permission to gain access to the controlled substance(s).
If a patient is going to lie to gain access to potential harmful drugs, how much effect do you think Jeffy's javascript OK dialog is going to have?
Cogito Ergo Sum
"Dear Customer, this is an official remainder from Amazon: You have been patented by our Company."
That's right you heard it first here. I hearby patent the word "Hi" and all usage of said word in the stimulation of interaction with other people, plants, animals and all other items real or imaginary. You may now pay me.
they included a small stack of green notes with it!
http://www.neobard.info - wacky world of me
They also got another patent... They patented the process of applying for patents.
At least get it right
1) Not their definition, though it may be right onm. As noted in the post title refers to a quote by Ambrose Bierce (in The Devil's Dictionary)
2) If you are making a direct quote you need to leave it intact though possibly put in a (sic) to note an error in the original quote
3) In law, appeal is a transitive verb
-------- This space intentionally left blank --------
My theory is that Jeff Bezos is an anti-IP anarchist working to bring down the patent system from the inside.
I just got the following message:
WARNING
----------------
You're about to purchase Linux Bible, 2005 Edition, which should not be read in combination with Windows XP for Dummies that you bought last week.
This item has been made unavailable for your purchase for the next 10 years, when the effects of the first item are completely gone!
Uncopyrightable: The longest word you can write without repeating a letter.
I seriously want to apply and get paid for royalties on a word and related words.
My command line edonkey client has warned me for duplicate downloads for ages: "you already have file [...]" or "you're already downloading [...]"
It seems to me that Amazon's main advantage, and its basis for most of its patents, is the fact that they were the first merchant to use collaborative filtering (using Bayes' Law to determine what the user will likely do next based on the actions of users with similar habits). While collaborative filtering is something widely used in AI, it seems like Amazon is slowly patenting every single practical application of it, to the point that sooner or later Amazon will be the only company allowed to use computerized statistics in their technology.
Apparently the "piece of string" has been patented also.
Everyone who tied a piece of string to their finger to remind them of something should be hearing from the lawyers soon!
Like shipping for free when you purchase a certain amount... That needs to be defensively patented. Or showing an excerpt from the book as a sales promotion... That needs to be patented as well... What about this. Oh yeah and don't forget to patent the idea of putting customer reviews on the site as well. Its disgusting what can get a patent these days.
News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
I guess when my dentist auto-reminds me for a cleaning after my root canal my HMO is goint to have to split the claim check and send a portion to Bezos.
Lovely.
Could just just imagine what life would be like today if the person who first thought to wipe his BUTT patented the idea?
Keep this up and you'll need a lawyer, and a full time staff of research assistants to let you know if it's OK to click on a link to find out something you'd like to know!!
I have a bumber sticker in my cubicle that says
Patents are simply a bargaining chip in today's technology battlefield. The problem with patents is self-perpetuating and there's nothing we can do about it now, big business will never let them go away.
... When they open-sourced Solaris ... wasn't there about 1200 patents that were open-source licensed ? All big software companies do the patent game. If you think they don't ... you're fooling yourself.
... and that's because they protect every piece of it the government lets them. It just makes business sense... why wouldn't you do everything you can to protect your investment in your company?
Chances are, at least one thing you use in your product ( which for Amazon is their web-based store ) is already be patented by another company.
Everybody jumps on Amazon for it, but nobody complains about how many patent applications IBM files every year or how many actual patents they receive. Sun is the same way
So, in this minefield of patents, it *IS* a defensive measure to have a good portfolio of patents... Because the way *MOST* patent battles playout is that two companies will look at the opposing library of patents and basically trade licenses against their patents.... That's it, plain and simple.
Anyways, at least be honest with yourself and realize that Amazon isn't the only company that's seeking patents on things. Amazon does offer the best shopping experience on the web
'nuf said.
All the clever comments on slashdot don't help much. Why not give the USPTO the feedback it needs when it does something dumb? Send the link to this article to: usptoinfo@uspto.gov They might then get the idea that there are consequences for stupid decisions.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
I don't think you can do that. I think Amazon has a patent for digitally making suggestions and then, subsequently linking to those recommended items.
I give men fish.
Would be, "You previously purchased some weed from us, now try LSD at 10% off!"
is to patent sarcasm. :)
"Build something idiot proof, and someone will build a better idiot" - Samuel Clemens
No, they key is to include the phrase "with a computer." If you file a patent about asking customers questions using a computer, then you should get it.
I'm just glad I'm in the UK where none of these stupid patent shenanigans apply.
The patent system is supposed to give those with novel ideas short-term exclusive use of those ideas. There are a number of ways to bust these patents, one of which is demonstrating prior art. If this cannot be demonstrated, guess what? It's a new idea! They get to use it. Good for Amazon. They get corporate dibs.
If there's any wrongdoing here, it's by the patent office. What Amazon is doing is totally legal. Rather than blame Amazon for the world's evils, decide whether everything you do is morally righteous.
You can boycott Amazon, and they clearly don't care, while me and millions of others can sit back and enjoy the low prices and convenience. The more I read, the more it seems like this is a small point of ideology that in the end is only benefitting the relationship between the best retailer on the planet and the consumer. Also consider that Amazon works with hundreds of other companies worldwide. Are you going to boycott OfficeDepot, Toys 'R' Us, and Target as well?
Patent reform is the way to go. Amazon is just doing what the system allows and should not be indigted for any wrongdoing.
At first glance, I thought the article read Remaining Customers Patented by Amazon. It made me nervous that the textbook I'm expecting on Friday would come with a patent inspector who'd staple a bar code to me or something.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
1. Submit patent -> gets rejected.
2. Change a word and resubmit -> gets rejected and submitter faces a small fine.
3. Change another word and resubmit -> gets rejected and submitter faces a multiplying fine.
4,5,6,7...on the scheme of 3. etc.
I would go even further. In court they have the concept of frivolous lawsuits. If you bring a suit which is found to be frivolous, you will face a contempt of court penalty. We need the same concept in patents (assuming that we are going to allow patenting software or algorithms at all, which should itself be a slam bang no) - contempt of patent office. This way, step 1 in your plan would already cost the offender dearly.
Profit by Jeff Bezos
1) Patent the obvious
2) Rewrite the patent and try again
3) Rewrite the patent and try again
4) Rewrite the patent and try again
5) Rewrite the patent and try again
6) ???
7) PROFIT! $$$
?SYNTAX ERROR
...you can't patent saying "Hi." That would be ludicrous.
But I herebye patent saying "Hi" on the internet. Suck on that!
Just give it time man, they are working up to that.
"But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong" - Dennis Miller
He doesn't need to patent it to do that. All he needs to do is publish the idea, then it cannot be patented by anyone else, as it then becomes "prior art." I'm sure he's is well aware of that.
Blah blah blah merit blah blah blah prior art blah blah blah novel blah blah blah [only] seems obvious blah blah blah
(This is going to come off harsh because I am exasperated not with you but with what seems to be a complete society wide cavein to thuggery)
Not defending it? And then you defend the indefensible? These Amazon patent turds are frivolous on the face of it. Any patent examining process with one tenth the common sense God gave a moth would make short work of rejecting this crap With Prejudice!
Prior art is not the only thing that rules out a patent. It also has to be NON OBVIOUS. Duh! We'll use some cookies and crap so the buyer only has to click once. Yippee. Oh, and if it looks like a duplicate order, we'll remind them they've already ordered it. Wow.
We are talking about the USPTO, remember??
;-)
There is not nearly enough love in the world, but there is far too much trust.
So, basically everyone is right and this patent is incredibly broad and covers merely reminding a user that they already ordered something by storing data in a database.
I imagine the only reason this was allowed is that the USPTO could not provide any evidence that this existed before July 6, 2001 because no one would think to document such as a minor feature.
...Jeff Bezos patents YOU!
In my online game, users have a negative effect occur to them if they try to aggress another player that they've already aggressed recently. I cross-reference this with a database query and remind them if they have aggressed the other player. I've been doing this for quite a while. Is that not prior art?
In all reality, Amazon just successfully patented a single database query.... absolutely ridiculous.
A community-oriented lyrics site
KeS
I know it is ridiculous.
I believe the popular consensus is that the word is spelt "rediculous".Shame on you!
Uh huh....
e ss
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=aggr
A community-oriented lyrics site
I couldn't agree more. It appears that if something has always been done in the real world, as soon as it can be done in a software program, someone can patent the age-old idea and own it.
When I come back to my desk after lunch and see an important file sitting on my chair - instead of say, on my desk where it would get burried and lost - I then take careful note of this file and try not to lose it.
So now, when I do this in software, where you can send an instant message to someone with a flag saying, "Stay on Top" of all other windows, I guess that this idea can be patented as well.
I want to know the answer as to what exactly needs to be done in the USA to get rid of software patents? What is the process? Who do I talk to to find out what we have to do? What kind of lobbying must be done? How many letters have to be written? Any thoughts?
Only victims make excuses
They should patent sending periodic emails to potential customers (ie SPAM), then sue everyone else who attempts it. Now that would be a use of the patent system that I could approve of.
It's a valid verb, but the GP was using it incorrectly.
A does not agress B, but rather agresses against B. It is much like transgressing.
This a nice proof that the U.S. patent bureau will grant a patent on anything, you just need to try enough times.
So Amazon could patent their way to remind customers, but anyone else could do the same if they use a different method.
Either this is being blown out of proportion, or the US patent system is even more screwy than I thought...
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.