Slashdot Mirror
Google Patents RSS Advertising
IO ERROR writes "Google filed a patent application for targeted advertising in RSS feeds about a year and a half ago. The USPTO has now assigned it a number and placed it online. The patent application covers both targeting in RSS feeds and geotargeting by IP address. It gives some insight into how Google's ad servers work."
Slashdot has RSS feeds for a number of years, and during that time they've run many Slashvertisements.
...Oh wait. Does not compute..... Brain is going to explode
...But I like the way google advertises. Whether it be in Gmail, in search results, or on Froogle. RSS is just another medium to explore. If they continue to stay unobtrusive, I wish them the best of luck.
I don't get it.
I bet that the number of examiners at the USPTO that have a comprehensive understanding of the way RSS works is exactly zero. I'm can only imagine an examiner breathlessly intoning, "I don't know what the hell this patent is talking about, so it must be totally new, non-obvious, and useful, so here," (THUMP as the rubber stamp comes down) "patent granted."
Of course, it could be a defensive patent. Heaven knows who out there thinks he's patented the whole RSS idea.
Still, regarding this new patent, I'm looking forward to the usual Slashdot pick-apart, where every claim is shown to be something people have been doing for a decade, and enough prior art is unearthed in fifteen minutes to invalidate the patent ten times over.
Heck, why doesn't the USPTO lay off half its examiners and just post patent applications to Slashdot?
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
i would just like to announce to the world that i would love to patent myself... if i don't somebody else will...
-Sj53
Take THAT Amazon.
Booyah
Being funny is my sig nature.
This is bullshit. What is "advertising"? Isn't Slashdot's RSS feed advertising the stories linked to it? Hell, I've got prior art of actual clickable "banners" in RSS feeds I syndicate, that link to people paying me to insert their commercial messages.
The PTO has become the "Monopoly Department" of the US Government. All day long they process applications for monopolies on businesses, responding "You go, girl!" to every one they possibly can. Now Google starts locking in all that "goodwill" they generated with inane faith-based nonsense like "do no evil". How long until they just patent "doing evil", on the premise that if they control it, they'll stop everyone else from doing it?
--
make install -not war
Can one really patent a medium? I'm not convinced that such a patent would stand up to what I'm sure would be numerous legal challenges. It is not as direct as attempting to patent advertising in other mediums (pick your poison), but it seems to be skirting the edge.
everything is evil. life is evil. you are evil. kill yourself.
What's the difference? Are not slashvertisements much older?
threadeds blog
Google on the whole seem to remain a force for good. The cynic in me does wonder how long that can last after going public, but on balance I'm a long way from consigning Google to the Bad Guy List
However, software patents remain evil, even if it's Google that holds them. I just thought that bore repeating.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
The patent covers targeted advertising, not advertising in RSS,Targeted meaning IP address location. However, targeted advertising could cover any search engine that displays sponsored results next to search results by keywords. However, this patent only covers RSS, so it may not prove to be too useful.
The patent system will collapse in a few years since patents are now being handed out to just about anyone willing to file for one. There is no more requirement for the patent to be non-obvious. The problem seems to be the examiners don't understand the fields for the patent applications they are responsible for. As an example, tying certain kinds of knots would be non-obvious to someone who doesn't use rope a lot, but that doesn't mean I should be able to patent the Monkey's Fist.
The end result of this is that, eventually, all patents will become meaningless. There will be large-scale infringement because so many patents will cover things that are so obvious that everyone will need to or want to do them. How many years from now will we enter this new era of ignoring the broken system? Frivolous patents are hastening the end of all patents.
The prior art probably doesn't matter. The PTO has a huge backlog so their searches are going to be shallow and they will likely not find the prior art. And once someone gets a patent, it is SOO expensive to challenge it that only big companies can do so, meaning the true innovators who if you'll recall were usually the small guys working out of their garage or whatever have no chance.
Patents today should last for no more than 5 years, and copyright for no more than 75 years. That stuff about basing copyright on the date the creator dies is bullshit now that corporations frequently own the copyrights. The technologies have changed, the laws have not.
BOO to Google on this.
rooooar
Microsoft just announced that they've changed their minds and won't be including RSS in IE7
George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
The USPTO does not have the ability to determine the official "patentability" of any non-simple invention (and even simple ones). Patent officers are overworked and undertrained. The theory is that the validity of patents will be hashed out in the courts. Wasted resources? Of course. Stifled innovation? Obviously. How many letters have any of you written to your representatives recently?
Now this is the type of patent I'd like to see more of!
If only I had patented the blink tag and pop-ups. Either I might have prevented those nightmares; or I could have extracted royalties for infringment. Win-win!
I'd be just as angry if Microsoft did this. In fact, I'm probably more angry because I hold you to a higher standard. Even if this is a defensive patent, I want to hear you speaking out against the system, donating to the EFF or something. How about instead of "Do No Evil", you start doing good?
The more you know, the less you understand.
"Do no evil" eh? Wankers.
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
Hmm . . . what about those inventions that take longer than 5 years to bring from patent to market? Should we just tell those people, "Tough luck."? I hope you don't care much for healthcare advancements.
I think we need to do something about this. Someone should form a non-profit organization to act as a holding company for patents. Then every Slashdot reader should file a patent for something fairly obvious and donate it to the NPO. Any large company claiming to have "defensive-only" patents should gladly contribute theirs as well. Then, once the NPO was stocked with a substantial number of high-value patents, they would run raids against the holdouts, saying "Give us YOUR patents or we will sue you into oblivion." After a few years of threatening letters and litigation, the NPO would have patents for every valuable bit of thought in the modern world! I'm sure such a dangerous entity would have very little trouble getting lawmakers to gut software patent laws altogether.
:-\
See, I woulda formatted this as a "1...2...3...4. Profit!" post, but it's an NPO I'm talkin' about.
Contrasting this patent with the likes of Amazon's common sense-patents which were approved (Web Services Patent, Reminding Customers, and User Viewing Histories), I'll acknowledge Google's patent has some credibility. Even though I've always been against patents related to or involving software, this is a much better patent than we've seen in the news recently, and considerably more deserving of approval.
For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.
the government patents *you*!
there's no place like ~
For our next worship service, I'd like to break out an old favorite of mine. Please turn to page 17 in your hymnals.
Shameless, shameless we adore thee
God of the web, lord of search
Personal Info we all give thee
Leaving our data in the lurch
We don't care, we just hate Bill Gates
We know you don't do evil
Will you change? We don't think about it
We just want e-mail retrieval
All thy web projects surround me
Your share valuation reflect thy rays
Sheep and fanbois all surround thee
Center of all endless praise
Blog and mail, you never fail
Inventing stuff we've seen before
But like sheep we will still praise thee
And keep clamoring for more
Googleujah, Googleujah, Googleujah, rejoice
All must join the mighty chorus
Which us l33t stars began
Google's love is reignning o'er us
Our fawning love is part o'the plan
Always singing, never thinking
What they'll do when THEY are king
We just enjoy your hyperlinking
And wondering what new toy you will bring
Our privacy is shrinking
Personal privacy - wishful thinking
"Pastor Google" serving free thinkers since never.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Hmm . . . what about those inventions that take longer than 5 years to bring from patent to market?
OK, backpedal to this: Patents on an invention that is implementable on a general purpose computer in the prior art, using input and output devices in the prior art, connected to a network in the prior art, should last only five years after grant.
How is putting ads in an RSS feed clever, or for that matter, an invention?
I remember the day when patents were given for things that were ingenious and the result of scientific, scholarly engineering. Putting an ad in a RSS feed is not only annoying, but just as bad as any other software or method patent.
Sorry, I'm not going to rubber stamp my approval on this just becuase its from Google.
Google Submits Patent Request: RSS Ads
w00t?
If Google is working on a new way of doing RSS advertising, wouldn't it be fiscally irresponsible to NOT try to patent it? What if they unveil a masterful system they've been working on for a year, only to find out Yahoo patented one of the methods 3 months ago, and were forced to shelve it as the legal battle ensued?
Advertising is most (if not all) of their revenue. They'd be silly not to try to protect it. How would you feel if your google stock dropped 20% because they were trying to be nice and got screwed by a competitor?
Guns are bad, but you still shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight.
(here it comes) In Soviet Russia, software patents you!
My sig is permanently on strike.
It seems like this patent is Google's entree into the slimy practice of patenting anything it can get its hands on. Google will be able to share its presence with other notable offenders, like Amazon, Microsoft, and several other firms. Because this is a principle in which I believe strongly, Google's method of advertising, though arguably one of the better ones in practice, will take a back seat to other, more salient issues - like their willingness to patent methods that have prior art, and that aren't really innovative. My willingness to continue using Google will last as long as its willingness to remain free of stupid patents.
5 year patent, 12 year copyright. Or abolish intellectual property law completely and replace it with a Creative Commons-style mandatory attribution to protect against fraud and plagiarism.
I have no mod points to give, but this point needs to be emphasized. This is the fundamental principle under which the USPTO has operated since its inception. You may not like it, but that's their charter. They are obligated by law to grant any patent that they believe in good faith has the potential to be enforcable and upheld by the courts. There is no "burden of proof" criteria involved; the USPTO must defer that decision to the courts.
Ever time something about USPTO comes up here, everybody gets tons of mod points here for blasting these "idiots" and "dolts" for not doing their jobs. I have no vested interest, but for crying out loud, at least these folks are indeed doing their jobs!
No matter what we may think of the concept, this is the way the USPTO works by law. If you don't like it, don't complain about the examiners, complain about the law that chartered them, and complain to somebody that can do something about it.
How many letters have any of you written to your representatives recently?
The trouble with advertising is that it distorts the normal self-organizing tendency of people to value the best product and depreciate the worst. Do you honestly think the Bronze Age ended because the iron sword manufactures ran a worldwide advertising campaign boosting the advantages of iron?
"Is this Winkhorst a nova criminal?" "No just a technical sergeant wanted for interrogation."
AdSense for feeds beta was almost out 2-3 weeks back. See url https://www.google.com/support/adsense/bin/answer. py?answer=20012&ctx=en:search&query=RSS&topic=0&ty pe=f and you can apply for it @ http://services.google.com/ads_inquiry/aff. It also includes nice set of best practices http://www.google.com/support/adsense/bin/answer.p y?answer=20134
The important thing is not to stop questioning --Albert Einstein.
For the past 5-10 years we've seen an onslaught of abuse of the patent system, with companies patenting technologies and methodologies that are blatantly obvious even to people with basic understanding of the field. Nobody patented "one click shopping" before Amazon because it was so obvious that it didn't appear to need patenting. Amazon recently received a patent for "reminding customers," for god's sake. Patenting RSS advertisements is an obscene abuse of the system, and Google should be ashamed.
There is a serious problem with the USPTO, and that problem seems to be its employees. It doesn't seem like they have the means or desire to hire competent people to review these patents, and if they aren't going to do it then the only recourse is to change the nature of the patents themselves, which Congress can do. Now, getting Congress to do something that would benefit the populace at the expense of corporate greed is another matter.
Google would do well to remember the old adage that goes something like, "If you save a million lives and fuck one sheep, people remember you as a sheep fucker." No matter how much goodwill they've earned through "not being evil," it's going to take very little to negate it all, and it looks like the turning may have begun.
rooooar
they're just patenting a METHOD to serve up specific ads based on figuring out your location based on your IP address.
You can always come up with a DIFFERENT way to serve up specific ads based on figuring out your location based on your IP address and do it.
Software patents -- at least in their current form(s) of existence -- might be a Bad Solution, but they're hardly evil. They are evil only if you believe that authors should hold no rights over their creation (because "Information wants to be free"). Only then is there any reason in completely rejecting software patents -- or any other forms of protecting some form of creation or invention -- as 'evil'. If, however, the creators of software are to be protected (and Copyright is not Good Enough), software patents turn out to be just a bad solution to a problem. Unfortunately, they seem to be the only existing solution.
Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
The end result is that the USPTO evaluates itself and its employees on throughput of patents. The USPTO is a very profitable agency and Congress likes the extra funds it sees coming from there so the chances of meaningful reform to reduce patent grants isn't looking so good. If they would shift some of the cost of the application process up to the begining of the process that might make them more likely to reject more patents since it won't hurt the revenue stream too much and it would also make people think twice about filing absurd patents. Of course the downside to that would be that it would make patenting a lot harder for the little guy who might not be able to risk the pattent application being rejeted.
I never said I was smart, I just said I was smarter than you
and is about as patentable as "pizza delivery technique using car and phone". But no matter since as a matter of course the USPTO will rubber stamp this as they do all applications for the right to steal the freedom of the human mind, errm I mean for "intellectual property" rights.
After all, an economy encumbered by lawyers controlling our thoughts is what made capitalism and America great!!!
The more patents there are in the advertising space, the more likely it will be that anyone operating in that space will get sued for violating some patent. If Google wants to patent every form of advertising known to man, more power to them.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
We need to start asking this loudly, over and over again, until someone answers.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
When is the USPTO going to grant a patent that covers the act of using data and information in some random context? Oh, sorry.. I haven't been paying attention for the last few years..
The law is borked, not the idiot corporations that use it, including your precious picture perfect Google. You can't expect a corporation to sit on its ass while all the other idiot corporations reep the benefits of idiot law makers.
So I'm in Sanjose... listening/watching a SanJose based radio/tv channel/station... and I get advertisements for LOCAL auto dealers, stores, contractors...
I don't get ads for anything in Boston/NewYork or even LA... even SanFrancisco does not show up on my TV/radio station....
While I despise software patents like this it is likely just a defensive patent. Given the current patent system someone was inevitably going to patent this, given that google hasn't yet abused their patents I'd rather it be them than someone like amazon. Until the patent system is fixed the good guys need to get patents like this so they can fight back against other companies who are somewhat evil.
I stole this Sig
I submited this as well wich did not go back to my own homepage and it has The Register as source.
The article even tells that it is used already since almost two years. Talk about previous art.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Now if only they don't license it, and enforce it vigorously!
Normally I'm totally against software patents, but this is an area of software development that could use some stifling.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
An important claim of Google's patent application is targeting -- directing only certain ads at certain types of customers. I don't think /. did that, did they?
If you think that will lead to a lot of bankrupt companies, you're probably wrong. I believe what this is known to lead to is fewer low-end market entrants, since the low-end cannot afford the lawsuits. But at the upper end, large companies that own a lot of patents just write contracts agreeing to mutually not sue each other, and so they lock in an elite few who are allowed to participate in the market. I could have misjudged your political position, but I'm guessing this is not something you'd see as a "good effect". Certainly I do not.
I believe your literal words identify literally the mostly likely outcome of their action--that is, "more [commercial] power [will come] to them".
Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
Who can point me to a good search engine? (good in both "no crappy results" and "no evil patents" sense)
You know what.
Open Source li E nux :
lair of liars and losers.
And if you didnt know :
then you are one of those poor laboratory test mice and rabbits of the open source LIeNUX movement.
patents are evil :
how else can one carry on with the grand fools and losers show of reverse engineering, stealing and copying.
I hope this is one patent they keep, holds up. And they DON'T license. Maybe they don't want to actually advertise via RSS, and they have the patent to keep anybody else from advertising via RSS either.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
in this whole darn thread!
and to be on topic:
IMHO, the reason so many people like google (disclosure:I am one of them) is because their adverts detract the least from the browsing experience.
------ no thanks... I've quit
who cares about RSS.
GOOGLE also has ATOM-based advertising patented.
I'm impressed you could tell this much from it. I found it pretty thick reading and hard to tell what it was getting at. (I suspect that's intentional, to reduce the number of eyes on the document.)
The primary weakness I see in the patent is the reference everywhere to a URL where they would have been smarter to use URIs. I suspect someone can "trivially" get around the patent with an appropriate shift of that detail.
The patent also references XML, RSS, and Atom by name, which seems equally well a weakness and is one of the strongest arguments I've seen so far for ditching XML (which I have other problems with anyway).
And while I was about to start using RSS, I am now forced to reconsider. On the one hand, I was actually planning to seek out Google's AdWords for use in RSS just because it seems a cool technology and possible source of funding for pages. But the fact that they are trying to patent the technology and compete not on "coolness of use" but on "force" makes me think that perhaps I should seek out and support competitor technologies...
I also think the RSS authors (or, at least, the users) should create WINNER (Winner Is Notationally Not Exactly RSS), so that it is neither XML compliant nor RSS, and hence doesn't fall under the patent ... At least, it doesn't look to me like it would then fall under the patent. Since RSS looks like it comes out of Harvard, maybe they have the lawyer power to look at the Google patent and work out a minimal workaround from the holes in how the patent is written...
Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
OH NO!!! More copyrights on technology this will slow innovation, stop creativity and bring an end to the computer industry! Not another patent! Run for the hills.
Oh sorry I didn't notice that the corporation's name was Google, I guess we don't bitch about their patents do we?
e e cummings
i should stick to the the poetry
if i were you
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
several people have been doing this for years, but only the big evil corporations have the money to get these nothing-special ideas patented.
1. Form non-profit organization. 2. Get everyone to patent everything under the sun. 3. ??? 4. Stop everyone from making a PROFIT!
So if you use other technologies ,you're all good.
I think this is just another proof that Google is not that much different from Microsoft. They are playing a similar game, and they have to, because how else can they survive? Remember Google's claims they're a search company? Yeah, they said that. Now they have email, Usenet, news, shopping, a personalized page that smells like a mini-portal, etc.
Simpy
Prior art - Moreover provide me with free RSS news feeds - they make the first item an advert, the advert is dependent on the search term.
HTML
XML
Google themselves advertised / provided the adverts on this when it first came out I believe - this might be where they started a year and a half ago - I can't see any evidence of Google involvement now though. Is there a Moreover/Google relationship?
UK Laptops
While it appears inevitable that people are going to flame Google for doing this, if I were running a business I would do the exact same thing.
The current state of technology patents is dreadful. To us technology people, many of the patents just appear to be common sense? Patents are being granted left and right for things that just seem normal and easy to us. Unfortunately, that is the way things are...for now. If you are operating a business, it is in your best interest to try and patent everything you do. If you don't, someone else will and then sue you for infringing on their patents. Trust me, the cost of trying to file patents is nothing compared to the cost of being sued for patent infringement.
So don't blame Google or Microsoft or Amazon. For lack of a better euphemism, don't hate the player, hate the game.
If Microsoft did this the article summary would be critical, instead of a subtle compliment.
You're all whores.
Does this mean Google can now sue all the porn sites with ads reading "Hot sexy singles are waiting for you in [your location]!"
Amazon has a patent on a mouse click, MS has a patent on the double click, everyone is getting dumb pattents now, it is a nuclear standoff of sorts, and MS is painting a huge target on Google now, so if they would try the patent rout, Google could return the favor.
It doesnt take an MBA to ubnderstand that these patents are being used in self defence, and it all started with Amazon, blame Jeff Bezose.
oh i get it, when google patents stuff its innovative. but when microsoft patents anything its all OH NO THEYRE TRYING TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD RUN FOR COVER BEFORE THEY PATENT YOU!!!
... this is one hell of a clever move by Google.
/. would like to see FireFox winning over browser marketshare(including myself), in any case - it aint going to happen anytime soon.
As much as folks here on
Microsoft includes RSS support into next IE release. Which in turn means, that RSS going to be much more popular than before (admit it - even tho RSS is much more popular than few years ago, it still aint used to max potential)
Now - since RSS is going to be much more popular for granted, why would Google want to share ad profits with their competitor (Microsoft)?
Especially, since Microsoft are catching up with Adsense, Additional info on context ads by Microsoft.
Dephine URL
the process of submitting and receiving patents...
No one here gets out alive
If the reasons for seeking this patent were interest protection, then Google could have done a better service to all by making their idea publicly known. Publicly purchasing an idea like this is questionable.
This is one of the many poor patent ideas that will probably still get passed. Then if Google chooses to become greedy it will have the opportunity to practice innovation suffication in the name of asset protection...
1. Form non-profit organization. 2. Get everyone to patent everything under the sun. 3. ??? 4. Stop everyone from making a PROFIT!
With a few minor changes, that's basically a dotcom business plan!
On a system or mechanism to cycle gas into a confined volume....
Now, I have patented breathing..
Every breath you take,
Every move you make,
I'll be charging you.
emt 377 emt 4
Maybe Google has a hidden motive in keeping with their slogan of not being evil.
Get a patent. And then prevent everyone else from putting ads in RSS feeds.
Could it be that Google is doing us a favor?....
Now all we have to do is convince Google to sue all the advertizers out of business!! Pitty that they will not go willingly...
(Like, for example... Google employees?)
. html
"Google does search. Google does not do horoscopes, financial advice or chat"
"From its inception, Google has focused on providing the best user experience possible. While many companies claim to put their customers first, few are able to resist the temptation to make small sacrifices to increase shareholder value. Google has steadfastly refused to make any change that does not offer a benefit to the users who come to the site"
http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/tenthings
the sun is god
This story about Google patenting RSS advertisements came to me from the Slashdot RSS feed, which had an advertisement on exactly this story.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
The author of the patent has on his homepage:
"I believe strongly in doing Internet research and sharing data and information in a free and open way. I am providing this data to the research community at large to make use of however they see fit."
I guess a public company as google changed his views.