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."
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
everything is evil. life is evil. you are evil. kill yourself.
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.
And if it were MS advertising in the same manner, you'd be screaming your brains out about evil, monopolizing corporations.
Take off your tin-foil hat plz kthx.
So much for Google's "do no evil" eh? I wonder how the rest of the Slashbot population will pick up on this.
I'm looking forward to the usual Slashdot pick-apart
No, this is Google, we like them. We'll call this innovative.
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?
Why are saying that the patent office has rubber stamped this? Not only do you have no evidence (which you can obtain by checking the PAIR system at the USPTO online), but it is not possible for you to have any evidence since what has been published is an application not a patent. If you could dislodge that thing you call a head from your ass for a few minutes and RTFA, or even RTFS, you would know this.
I'm not sure this would work the same way though. There is some provision in the RSS standard for new things, but it's usually up to the reader software how to display it.
Unless Google have been exceptionally clever and done something I can't even dream of, they must be either inserting adverts in a way that most readers will ignore, or else they're inserting adverts in the same format as news items.
In which case, news and adverts will become "merged" with each other.
That sounds pretty dodgy to me. I don't mind adverts I can easily ignore that are sectioned off from content, but if I have to skip adverts in the middle of my RSS news feeds I'll get annoyed. Equally, if I set my news feed to display 25 items, and I end up getting 22 items and 3 adverts, I'll be even more annoyed.
Until now Google's advertising has been nice and discrete. This sounds a lot less discrete. It sounds like a step in the wrong direction.
Caveat: I reserve final judgement until I see how a Google ad-enabled feed looks in my reader.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
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
No, no, no... You don't get it. See, if Amazon or Microsoft comes up with something like this, then they're evil for taking over basic mechanisms of the internet. If Google does something like this, it's an interesting "insight into how Google's ad servers work" and must be something that will be only good.
Get with the times, man.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
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.
Believe it or not, you can even find people who will only listen to music or read books by unpopular artists because they have an automatic bias toward the downtrodden, regardless of the artist's merits.
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.
Since I do not seem to be getting my point across, I will ask again:
How is it credible? Putting ads in RSS is just as bad as "one click" (from Amazon). Its not noteworthy, its not an invention, and its absurd.
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
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.
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
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.
Argh, it shouldn't matter. Using communication technology to transfer ads has existed since the Tuesday after written language was discovered. Using RSS for ads has been done (heck, Slashdot does it, if you believe some submissions are just ads in disguise). Targeting ads has also been done since advertising began. Taking two fucking obvious things and combining in them in a fucking obvious way is, well, fucking obvious, and shouldn't be patentable, no matter how much legalease you use to hide the fucking obvious fucking obviousness. Grrr - venting is fun.