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."

Comments

Self Defense?

[gbulmash]

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.

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.

Re:Self Defense?

[alvinrod]

Why not just release the "concept" or whatever you'd call it into the public domain? This way everyone can use it and no one can sue Amazon over it. I can understand wanting to patent a new engine or a radically different type of CPU that no one's ever though of before, but trying to slap a patent something that seems obvious and has more than likely been done a thousand times over since the beginning of time is a little ridiculous.

Re:Self Defense?

[A beautiful mind]

Heh. Parent is probably karma whoring by plagarism. It's nice to know that he even copied my typo (USPO vs. USPTO).

Re:Self Defense?

[jkabbe]

Another option (besides publication) is to submit a Statutory Invention Registration

From 35 U.S.C. 157:
A statutory invention registration published pursuant to this section shall have all of the attributes specified for patents in this title except those specified in section 183 and sections 271 through 289 of this title. A statutory invention registration shall not have any of the attributes specified for patents in any other provision of law other than this title. A statutory invention registration published pursuant to this section shall give appropriate notice to the public, pursuant to regulations which the Director shall issue, of the preceding provisions of this subsection. The invention with respect to which a statutory invention certificate is published is not a patented invention for purposes of section 292 of this title.

Basically it's a patent application without the examination part (and obviously you don't get a patent). It's probably a little better than publishing because:

1) the USPTO is more likely to be aware of an SIR than a specific article in a magazine, etc...
2) the disclosure required for an SIR is more than what most people include in an average-sized article

Ambrose Bierce had it right

[PhilHibbs]

Appeal
v.t. In law, to put the dice into the box for another throw.

Coming up....

[Anonymous Coward]

Soon, Amazon will patent the ordering of products via the internet.

Is there no prior art on this at all??

[jurt1235]

Relations in database do this kind of things all the time, and warn users about the consequences (usually blocking it completely).

Re:Is there no prior art on this at all??

[smittyoneeach]

In an abstract way, my wife.
That work of art neither forgets, nor hesitates to remind. ;)

It's a sad day for Intellectual Property when...

[Anti Frozt]

Jeff Bezos has to start reminding his customers that he owns patents on them

Illustrates the problem perfectly

[A beautiful mind]

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.

Re:Illustrates the problem perfectly

[dan the person]

In the last amendment, they didn't just change a couple of words, they also canceled 5 claims following a recomendation from the patent office.

Patent THIS!

[Bonzor]

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?

A simple question is warranted

[AutopsyReport]

So what changed their mind the sixth time?

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.

Re:A simple question is warranted

[nightgrinder]

It's more of a negotiation than a time-after-time rejection. If you read the docs, you'll find Amazon getting coached by the PTO staff as to how they cn form their claims to be accepted ("removing this claim, and re-phrasing that claim, will change this application to an allowable one").

little Hogwort?

[Psykechan]

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?

Re:little Hogwort?

[Math Avenger]

Yes, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is, indeed, Harry's school. Additionally, a hogwart is a type lily. It can be found, among other places, at Kew Gardens. So, "little hogwart" might be an affectionate sobriquet (like "little pumpkin") a parent might use to refer to their child.

Not Defending this, But

[putko]

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.

Thank you Amazon

[unoengborg]

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.

Next Amazon patent - "Selling"

[mrRay720]

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 and Running...

[Dalroth]

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

Re:7 Years and Running...

[drsquare]

I'm sure that all the millions of dollars they lost due to your boycott are more than offset by the sales gained through all these useful things like reminders and one-click buying.

And I find it really hilarious how you can boycott Amazon for their shady practices, then recommend Ebay as an alternative. Ebay make Amazon look like Jesus and his disciples.

What about Brick and Mortar?

[ehaggis]

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.

Re:It's a sad day for Intellectual Property when..

[turchinc]

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

Their reality or your reality?

[doc modulo]

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!

"Defense" where defense destroy any competition

[FreeUser]

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.

It's already working!

[TheUnknownCoder]

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!