Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Seeks Web Services Patent
theodp writes "CNET reports on Amazon.com's latest attempt to make inroads into consumers' wallets, a patent-pending online marketplace where consumers search and pay for Web services. The patent application describes a world in which Amazon collects fees from Web Service Providers who charge $500/month for AAA Street Maps, $200/month for driving directions, and $0.01/use for weather and human genome maps." From the article: "Amazon also notes its marketplace technology seeks to address the lack of easy-to-use methods for collecting consumers' Web services payments, as well as to provide Web services companies with ways to manage and monitor their offerings. In its role as an intermediary for the marketplace, Amazon would collect a fee from companies providing the service."
How the hell can you patent the ability to charge money in exchange for services!
Surely thats equivelent to patenting capitalism!
This sounds like a business directory, only online. How the hell could you patent something like this? It just doens't seem right.
perfected by generations of record company executives and book publishers: stick yourself between the money and the talent.
Sounds like the **AA organizations continuing efforts to sink a siphon into EVERYBODY'S wallets, whether they want it sunk or not.
You know, every time I read something along the lines "Amazon Does Something That Slashdot Users Are Going to Hate," I think of the EPIC 2014 flash, talking about Amazon and Google merging to control the 'net. Yeah, yeah, bad patents, etc.-- but the real question is, who else will do this work? Who else is going to handle the e-business for those too lazy to do it themselves? They have a valid point, that businesses want someone else to do collection and authentication.
/.: Do we actually resent companies who do things well, doing them? If not, then what's our collective problem?
And, of course, they aren't making some kind of patent requiring exclusivity. So anybody who *does* want to do it themselves, still can.
So, my question to
Personally I'm surprised Bezos doesn't have bodyguards and firearms at all times like Darl McBride with the way he pisses the OSS movement off.
...Amazon is attempting to patent the business practice of being both the owner of the mall and the payment processor rolled into one.
No, not a lot of new ideas here. No, not patent worthy in my estimation.
That being said, I do believe there is a market for a web services aggregator like this model - small web services, independently operated, but tied together through a unified interface and payment system would offer a lot of convenience for the non-/. crowd out there. There's a reason that the Yellow Pages continues to make money, and there's a reason that PayPal is successful. Amazon wants to position yet another incarnation of themselves there; kudos. But patenting the concept seems like a decent waste of government resources and time.
But if it'll get the Federal Government off of the Hot Coffee bandwagon, eh, what's a little more damage to the patent system...
Let's divide the world in two halves:
...
- United Patent States of Amerika: formerly know as the land of the free
- Rest of the World (tm): where every free-seeking developper, webmaster, etc will eventually go.
Although I'll probably be modded flamebait for this post, let's check in 5 years if the USA can still cope with the current system that eats liberties, innovation and more
Ah, yes, one more thing: I wish you good luck.
main(char O){O++&&(((O-291)*O+27788)*O-868020?1:putchar(O++
There's got to be a way to outlaw "patent predators". They're screwing up the system, filing "frivolous" patents for anything their lawyers can plug into the boilerplate, regardless of whether they invented it, own it, have a use for it, made it work, or any other criteria. They merely patent everything, because the only cost is lawyers' fees. Amazon and other corporations have lawyers on salary or otherwise at low cost for fixed time. So they become patent mills, making up with one "hit" on a patent that makes money all their losses on those that are rejected, or don't make money. But there's no "history" applied against a patenter that merely fills up the patent legal system with junk (including rejections). So there's no reason for them not to abuse the system - especially as its cost, especially in the Judicial Branch which tries/hears patent challenge cases, is so heavily subsidized by the taxpayers (of which corporations are very underrepresented).
Patent attorneys that have a "batting average" below some level, maybe 30%, should be barred from filing, or even working on, applications. Until maybe they've earned the right again, like by some kind of recertification from a real law school. And would-be patent holders below a certain percentage should also be barred. The PTO and courts should also be able to find people guilty of "patent abuse", which would bar them from applying for some sentenced time.
Until then, we have to expect that since the people are paying for these patents to be "attempted", the applicants will generate more of them. We have to get our Representatives to pass laws to rein in these serial abusers. And elect Representatives who will do so - the entire House is up for reelection in 2006, and 1/3 of the Senate. If we even make it more expensive for incumbents to get reelected, that will neutralize lots of corporate bribes^Wdonations that keep the status quo, at our expense.
--
make install -not war
The patent application describes a world in which Amazon collects fees from Web Service Providers who charge $500/month for AAA Street Maps, $200/month for driving directions, and $0.01/use for weather and human genome maps.
I've always thought of Jeff Bezos as some kind of Robin Hood. A guy that doesn't care about money so much as creating great services and technologies and bringing them to the world. Bear with me...but it occurs to me that if someone truly hated the current software patent norm and they had a lot of money, they could simply apply for every software patent they could think of and lock the patents up and throw away the proverbial key.
So I guess my question is, is there any reason to give Jeff Bezos the benefit of the doubt here? Is it possible, however improbable, that's he's applying for these seemingly absurd patents as a means of keeping the internet alive by not enforcing his patents?
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
"charge money in exchange for services!"
Its the world oldest profession. And being the middleman pimp is the worlds second oldest.
"And, of course, they aren't making some kind of patent requiring exclusivity. So anybody who *does* want to do it themselves, still can."
I'm a bit confused. Isn't exclusivity and licensing the point of patents? Amazon doesn't have a great track record of non-exclusivity.
Amazon Patents User Viewing Histories
Amazon Patents Cookies (from the "are you f'ing kidding me dept.)
Amazon One-Click Shopping
From what I can see, Amazon's primary business may be Amazon.com. But, it's secondary business is certainly to patent the obvious and the mundane, then attack its rivals with them. And there are plenty of rival companies out there already doing this for many services, not just web. In fact, you can sell web services over eBay now, using Paypal, also owned by eBay. How is this different?
I8-D
Wow, that was back in 2000 and Amazon continues to pile on lame-ass patents that they themselves recognize as something that shouldn't be patentable. I could see the angle of we're doing it preemptively for our protection if they'd had a legal document saying that they wouldn't sue any company or individual that didn't sue them first.
Amazon have pissed in the face of Tim Berners Lee (www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/), and every engineer since 1950, who have worked to develop technology that supports the Amazon way of life.
Amazon only exists because of the work of 100,000 people, NONE OF WHOM work at Amazon.
I know someone who works at Amazon, he does Perl coding. I don't see Amazon patenting Perl stuff.
All their credit cards, internet, protocols, databases, are all other peoples work. And now this.
WEB SERVICES WERE NOT INVENTED OR ENVISAGED BY AMAZON - they are once again stealing other peoples work, and just saying, well, we use them, so lets patent them.
They are steaking peoples work, and the f*ckers should be flogged, I have said it before and I wil say it again, Amazon are so f*cking arrogant to do this, they just take take take take take. Language? F*ck yeah, they can piss off.
You know, I bought a shed load of stuff off Amazon, I mean lots, $2500 in about 8 months, which is fairly good. I spend about the same at an online travel company. They have been good to me, so I still use them, Amazon have no pissed me off. Guess what, in the next 8 months, 0 for them.
So what they make more money than then entire readership of slashdot does in a week in about an hour of trading.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: inboard random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Wouldn't your average lawyer say the same thing about programmers?
I dont know-- maybe someone can ask the next lawyer they see how well they'd function without e-mail, WordPerfect, Lexis-Nexis, etc. At least with programmers, it's gobbledygook that does something.