Slashdot Mirror
Amazon's Patent-Pending Price Checks
theodp writes "On Thursday, the USPTO revealed that Amazon is back at the patent trough, this time for a System and method for obtaining information relating to an item of commerce using a portable imaging device. Sounds an awful lot like ScoutPal, which drew raves from Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, doesn't it?"
Once again those with deep pockets go forth and argue a case for something that has existed under another name or description, but not functionality. I think that is where the Patent Office falls down: the wording of applied patents.
It is in the practical examples and application of the descriptions that make "prior art." With sufficiently trained researchers (and sufficient numbers of said people... or bots??!!?) these types of applications and patents will be minimised at the door, and eventually even less will be brought in since it will be known that thorough checking will be done.
For every present, there is a past
Between you all get upset, please note that this is an application, as in Amazon drafted it and sent it to the USPTO but they havent looked at it yet. It's not the same as a granted patent.
You can send in an application for "...a method of wiping your arse comprising the step of utilizing paper in a back and forth rubbing motion" and that application would also be published.
No, they used an imaging barcode scanner. Not that you'd see a device like this hanging on a post at your local grocery store or anything, oh, no, they wouldn't have been doing that, violating this patent for the LAST FIFTEEN YEARS!!!
Oh, wait. The patent is only two years old? Never mind, I must be confused.
John
The title is broadly descriptive of the technology. The claims, especially the independent claims, tell you what Amazon are actually seeking protection for.
I also note it is pending, so any criticism of the USPTO should be withheld until it is granted and it can be determined what prior art was considered in examination and what scope of protection (if any) has been granted.
I've built a system for a retail shop that enables users to get price, availability information etc. from a server to a hand held device through WLAN. The same device can also be equipped with an GPRS adapter so users could go to another shop to check the prices against their own. This would not require a modification of the software, since the software doesn't care (in fact, does not even know) if the network is WLAN or GPRS.
So the whole patent boils down to the idea of doing it. There is IMO no technical invention behind that.
So, kicking the shopper (not customer) out of the store is fine - they were not going to buy anything anyway. Not when they find out that the same article is 20% less down the street at Wal-Mart. More information does not equal an empowered consumer. It just pushes the decisions the way that benefit some merchants.
Unfortunately, from the patent's abstract, that doesn't seem far off the mark.
It's hard to find a vast difference between Amazon's method and one of those grocery-checkouts where you wield the scanner yourself. The main departure might be that, at the grocery store, you usually already know what you're buying (...though the display tells you anyway). Seems Amazon has "invented" the circumstance where you usually don't know...
Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
So, first people in academia do this. Then, there are several shareware applications, some using bar code readers, some using cell phone cameras. Then a company like ScoutPal figures it out. And finally, Bezos sees it and patents it.
Well, let them waste their money: that patent is worthless. It's a testament to technological incompetence at Amazon. It is also something that will become a generic features of cell phones anyway.
Yes, the patent would be a pain to defeat against in court if it ever came to that. But the prior art is clear; in fact, it's better than one-click: one-click was so trivial that nobody had bothered writing it up academically, but this application has been published multiple times.
How about a reverse /. effect, in which not one of its subscribers ever uses Amazon? I wonder how much that would effect their servers/business, especially if it got picked up by the popular press. These people need to be stopped. I sure don't order books from them anymore.
We could call it Zero Click Ordering, and apply for a patent...
Is the road to wealth really to just watch sience fiction movies and read SF books and patent every gadget that looks cool? Even if you dont have the faintest idea about how to produce it you can get a patent and you can reap the benefits as soon as someone manages to make a product out of the idea, even if the idea is a century old. Even worse is that if you take an old idea and stick it onto another old idea you magically have a patent, even if you just combined two things like a catalouge and a ordering form in the back pages. I dont see how you could patent that. Still, in the online world you could patent something jsut like that.
I really honestly cant see how a patent system like this can help the US in the long run. The incentive to produce is substantially lowered and replaced with people who just litigate and patents obvious ideas. Theese people dont contribute a dime to the community since all the money they touch is fictional for a fictional service in a highly abstract market.
HTTP/1.1 400
I don't think I understand what you're trying to say. It seems to me that better information does empower the consumer, but that for some political reason you don't like what the consumer might do with that power. In addition, better information for the consumer in a competitive market pushes profits down toward i*K, that is, the interest rate times capital. It limits the profits of all merchants much more than does the status quo.
Can someone please point out where besides the original poster we are getting Amazon into this. I have checked through the published application and see nothing that directly references the assignment of this application to Amazon.
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."