Microsoft's Consent-or-Die Patent

theodp writes "Maybe you shouldn't get too attached to those new Windows Live services. On Tuesday, the USPTO granted Microsoft a patent for privacy policy change notification, which describes how to threaten users with the loss of their accounts and access to web sites and services should they refuse to consent to changes in a privacy policy. This includes the case where a user might object to allowing personal information, collected earlier with a promise of confidentiality, to be shared in the future with third parties. Also described is a 'Never Notify Me' option so you won't have to 'worry' over privacy policy changes."

Comments

Damn that's evil!

[MECC]

4. The method of claim 3, further comprising denying use of the selected information by the application until consent to the change is granted in response to the user interface.

5. The method of claim 3, further comprising denying use of the selected information by the application if consent to the change is denied in response to the user interface.

Damn that's evil! Really, what quicker way to drive away users - program your application to piss them off and then stop working.

Re:Unenforceable in many states

[TheRaven64]

The EU does not allow software patents, so this would be an illegal patent. There is no equivalent to the Berne Convention for patents, however, so the question is moot. That said, there is nothing stopping you from patenting an illegal activity, but since you can't make use of it then it's basically just a way of paying the government some money. You could, for example, patent a method for increasing the yield of opium plants, but you would not be able to do anything with this in the USA unless you spent a lot of money on lobbying.

(IANALTINLA)

Court case?

[bteeter]

Wasn't there a federal court case recently that specifically said policies like this were illegal?

I don't remember all the details, but from what I do remember it mandated that parties must be informed of any changes to contracts/agreements. You couldn't have a clause like "we don't need to notify you of changes to this agreement". So, if that is the case, doesn't it kill the entire purpose of this patent?

BTW - I really think things like this should not be patentable. This is not an invention.

Re:Me? Personally, I've caved, again and again.

[SCHecklerX]

On the rare occasions that I need to mail order rather than use the local bike shop, I love Speedgoat's privacy policy: http://www.speedgoat.com/aboutus-privacy.asp

Our Plain-English Privacy Policy
If you think you receive a lot of junk mail, you should see how much crap an on-line business gets every day! We're people here at Speedgoat, not a corporation, and we hate spam as much as you do (probably more), so we keep any and all correspondence you have with us to ourselves. Why is this so important? We live in a sneaky world filled with sleazy marketing techniques that count on complacency and a lack of knowledge. Ever wonder why you're receiving all that junk mail? Unfortunately, a number of businesses are in the habit of selling off your personal information. Even the friendly neighborhood grocery store is profiling you with each bleep of the product scanner.

Rather than hire an attorney to draft a 20 page privacy policy, we'll just keep it simple. Speedgoat Bicycles does not, and will not make any customer information available to any outside companies, organizations or individuals, period. We do not, and will not, sell customer information, and we will not reveal specific custom bicycle pricing. As on-line shoppers ourselves, we value your trust in us, and we respect your privacy.

Pretty refreshing to see that a smaller business 'gets it'.