Amazon Gets Patent on Consumer Reviews

theodp writes "Review your local dry cleaner, pay $10 million? Among the three new patents awarded to Amazon.com this week is one that covers collecting reviews by letting visitors to a Web site fill out a form. Amazon.com spokesman Craig Berman said he couldn't speculate on whether the company would attempt to license its new intellectual property." From the article: "In one embodiment of the patent, the system sends consumers a message inviting them to write a review in a predetermined amount of time after the purchase. It's a method widely used by online retailers, including Yahoo Shopping. The patent also covers the method of tracking who returns to rate products by asking them to click on a unique link in an e-mail. But the patent even covers collecting reviews by letting visitors to a Web site fill out a form. "

Comments

For what its worth

[QuaintRealist]

While the description seems to imply that Amazon is patenting user reviews, (and the article, which it quotes, does the same), these patents apply to purchase circles and sites that allow searchable reviews rather than to those who write the reviews. More of a threat to CraigsList.

Still another dumb ruling by the USPTO, though.

So Much For Those Bezos Reassurances!

[theodp]

Guardian Unlimited (2002): Bezos counters that Amazon has made numerous innovations in web commerce that have been widely copied which it didn't patent, such as...customer reviews. oreilly.com (2000): Jeff countered that Amazon has made countless other innovations in Web commerce that it didn't patent, and that have been widely copied.

Patent Reform.

[CDPatten]

This is outrageous. The biggest threat to the US economy isn't china or the eu like many analysts say, it's the abuse of patent laws. I think I am going to patent blowing your nose. Maybe I will patent the letter "t"; I'll trademark it too, and then charge royalties to all of you who use it on your keyboard. How absurd. We will see forums patented, etc. etc.

We need reform, and we need it NOW. I'd say the two biggest issues that the Federal government is failing in right now are Patent reform and Illegal Immigration.

If the the law doesn't stop soon, we will see our economy tank. When you stifle creativity and innovation (like these abuses do) then a free economy no longer exists, and that society will fail.

Re:Patent Reform.

[Ulrich Hobelmann]

I'm sorry you can't patent the letter "T". The German Telekom (who own T-Mobile) has already trademarked (just as good) the magenta-colored letter "T" and sued people who used that color, or who used a big letter T for logos and stuff like that.

Re:Patent Time Limit

[back_pages]

Perhaps there should be a limit on the amount of time that can pass between when an idea goes into use and when the patent application is submitted. That doesn't address the silliness of this patent, but at least it would have eliminated it.

35 USC 102(b) states:

Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless--
the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States, or

Therefore, there is a 12 month time limit on when the idea goes into public use and when the patent application can be filed. If that 12 month period is proven to have expired, it's called a statutory bar on patentability and it's extremely difficult, in many cases impossible, to achieve any patent protection for the concept.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

USPTO must be as well staffed as FEMA

[museumpeace]

I don't know if they are going to post it but I just submitted a bit to /. about how a a patent has been granted for an anti-gravity machine. The USPTO is infamous among /. readers for the idiotically obvious and obviously idiotic software and business process patents that it grants. Every time a new one of these howlers shows up here I complain that the USPTO is not doing its job and leaving the real work for the courts...where rich corporations will usually prevale. But they seem to hit new lows every month. Their own stated and court-tested policy is to refuse patents to any idea that violates known physical law. The examiner must be an idiot.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

A few important details

[sxyzzx]

Here is the patent in question.

For those too lazy to click, here's the primary claim:

A method of encouraging customers to provide reviews of purchased items, the method comprising:

receiving over a network an order from a first customer for an item purchased from an electronic catalog;

estimating by what date the first customer will have at least initially evaluated the item based at least on the item type;

initiating an electronic transmission, based at least in part on the estimated date, to the first customer on or after the estimated date of a message requesting the first customer to provide a review of the item to thereby encourage the first customer to provide at least one review, wherein the message includes a link to an electronic review form and activation of the link by the first customer causes the review form to be presented to the first customer;

receiving the review from the first customer electronically via the review form;

individually presenting the first customer review in a group of reviews to a second customer interested in the item; and

based at least in part on the first customer's review, using a collaborative filtering process to automatically generate personalized recommendations for the first customer of other items.

One thing that's common to all the claims is that the system estimates when the user will have evaluated the item, based on what kind of item it is. So if you always send the review request three days after shipping, you're not infringing the patent. OTOH, if you figure that books take longer than DVD's to evaluate, and therefore don't send a book review request for a week, then you may be in trouble.

Also, note that the patent application was filed in March 2000, so any prior art would have to predate that.

Interesting that the article omits these kind of details.

Re:Can anyone say prior art?

[Stonehand]

Now, I'm not an IP lawyer, but I do pay attention when IP lawyers talk, and I get thoroughly annoyed when people believe the article summaries and ignore the readily accessible primary documents.

Despite what Slashdot groupthink might have you believe, it is not relevant whether their is similar art *now*. It IS relevant as to whether there was similar art before the patent was filed -- which is years before the patent is ever granted. Furthermore, objectives are NOT patented; methods are. Thus, unlike what the summary might have you believe, Amazon has not patented a generic method for getting product reviews.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?u=/netah tml/srchnum.htm&Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&r=1&l= 50&f=G&d=PALL&s1=6963848.WKU.&OS=PN/6963848&RS=PN/ 6963848

Amazon, for instance, obtained US Patent 6,963,848. This was granted on November 8, 2005. It was *filed* March 2, 2000. PriceGrabber only started grabbing reviews in May of that year, and that by partnering with ConsumerReview.COM -- which may or may not have used methods specified in the patent. Amazon's VERY FIRST CLAIM, for instance, specifies that the covered system must do the receiving of the order AND the later solicitation of a review AFTER a reasonable period of time to allow for an initial experience. Unless ConsumerReview or PriceGrabber itself TAKES THE ORDERS, they would not appear to constitute prior art that would invalidate the first claim.

In fact, ALL TWENTY-EIGHT CLAIMS have this stipulation -- that the system itself takes the order for which a review occurs. Does Epinions take the order, or merely send you to someone else? Does NexTag? Does PriceGrabber? Did you read the freaking patent AT ALL?

Go vomit at your own laziness, and at the Moderator that would declare you Insightful.

Re:And this is *why* it's getting stupid

[Znork]

'Nowadays most patent offices around the world are "self funded"'

Not only is the patent office itself 'self funded', the actual patent system itself has nobody responsible for its budget. The money going into patent holders pockets doesnt materialize from thin air; the method of creating income through monopoly rent is comparable to product taxes.

So the patent-fee funded PTO joyfully assigns the equivalent of taxation rights all around, and the consumers and citizens are more or less powerless to do anything about it because theres nobody to hold directly responsible.

Of course, that was the entire idea from the start; when the kings of old wanted more income, but were reluctant to impose further taxes on an annoyed population, they instead handed letters of patent to merchants and nobility in exchange for funds or support, and the patent holders got to exact the funds from the population. Blame got shifted and everyone got what they wanted. Except the population of course.

Re:But what if someone steals your work?

[Charcharodon]

There is a big diffenence between writing a novel and what they are doing. It's more like hey what a nifty idea, I think I patten the idea of a novel, well wait everyone already knows what a novel is I can't patten that, I know I'll patten the method of writing the novel and in effect patten the concept of the novel itself. First I'll get one for righting it with a pencil, when that runs out I'll extending it by adding in right handed, then left handed, and then a typwriter, then by phone, by newspaper, etc, etc, etc.

They did not in any way conceiveable way or form come up with the concept of customer reviews just some extremely basic software to post it and track it, of course most of that already existed in the form of foruums, but I doubt they'll simply go after people who are copying their software, they'll go after anyone that puts outa similar result.

Re:Amazon needs to focus on profit

[Anonymous Coward]

Patents portfolios have become the business-world equivalent of nuclear weapons. They're not to protect some unique idea; they're a deterrent to being sued. "So, you want to bring your piddly little infringement case against us? Let see how many of our patents *you're* violating."

Jeff Bezos has stated that he feels the system is broken -- but that doesn't mean Amazon's not going to play the game. They have to; ignoring patents when you're a big fish is corporate suicide.

Then there's also the game to see just how silly of a patent you can get approved...

Re:And this is *why* it's getting stupid

[SerpentMage]

Excuse me????

Patents are NOT affordable by private inventors and have stopped being affordable a long time ago.

http://www.patents.com/cost.htm, http://www.ipwatchdog.com/patent_cost.html

        * Relatively simple invention - $3,000 to $5,000
        * Invention of minimal complexity - $5,000 - $10,000
        * Invention of moderate complexity - $10,000 - $15,000
        * Invention of intermediate complexity - $15,000 - $20,000
        * Relatively complex invention - $20,000 and up

Look at these costs, as they are not chump change. This is only a patent in the US. To get a European patent knock on another 20,000K. Then to defend your patent you need yet again a 300 USD per hour lawyer. Frankly the reason why there are so many patents is because lawyers and the patent offices have how to create an economy where there should be none.