Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Wants Patent For Inserting Ads Into Books

Posted by Soulskill on from the it-was-the-best-of-times,-it-was-comcastic dept.

theodp writes "Three Amazon inventors set out to correct what they felt was a real problem: that 'out-of-print or rare books ... typically do not include advertisements ... the content is fixed and, therefore, has not been adapted to modern marketing.' Their solution is spelled out in newly-disclosed Amazon patent applications for On-Demand Generating E-Book Content with Advertising and Incorporating Advertising in On-Demand Generated Content. From the patent apps, here's what the future of reading may look like: 'For instance, if a restaurant is described on page 12, [then the advertising page], either on page 11 or page 13, may include advertisements about restaurants, wine, food, etc., which are related to restaurants and dining.' So, what would a delightfully-tacky-yet-unrefined Hooters ad do for your Hemingway experience?"

9 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. How Pointless.... by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is totally pointless. I mean, if you already paid for the book, why should there have to be ads? Heck with digital distribution why even have ads on free stuff because the price of the device itself more than makes up for the minuscule price of transfer.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:How Pointless.... by shoemilk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because they are greedy. Why stop there? Why not insert the name of the restaurant into the text? Auto replace "restaurant" with "Chili's". Does the main character put on a coat? Why not make it an Armani coat? Does she take a sip of water? Spice up that water to your brand soft drink for a small fee! Why stop there? Let sponsors have characters "As Captain 'Pizza Hut' Ahab looked out over the sea, he saw her, Moby Dick, brought to you by Target."

      Seriously, though if I wanted ads breaking up what I was reading, I'd buy a newspaper. But I don't so I'll never buy one of those books or a newspaper.

    2. Re:How Pointless.... by Garbad+Ropedink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If that ever came to be I would wholeheartedly endorse book burning.

      Good god, why not just stick ads in all the old works? I'm sure Picasso would have put a coke machine in Guernica if he knew how cool and refreshing it was....
      'I painted this to protest the lack of coca-cola in my homeland. It will be returned to Spain when there is a coke machine on every corner'

      --
      And that was the last Terry Fox run I ever participated in.
    3. Re:How Pointless.... by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I keep seeing this faulty argument involving the concept of "paying twice". It's not that you're being asked to pay again, it's that you didn't fully "pay" the first time. It'd be like buying a $10 product and paying $5 up-front, and having the other $5 paid by advertising it shows.

      The vast majority of books do not include such advertisements, but the publishers do still turn a profit. It's not like with magazines, where the costs of a print run are typically higher than revenue from subscription fees. With books, you're usually paying for the costs of printing the book and an extra amount on top. Thus, the idea that you aren't paying for the book in full is simply false. The ads are just extra profit for the publisher.

      It's greed coupled with a total disregard for the artistic integrity of a work.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    4. Re:How Pointless.... by DreamsAreOkToo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except it doesn't work like that with ads. You can watch public television for free and get ads, or you can pay money to watch cable television and get ads. You can pay $50 for Battlefield 1942, or you can pay $50 for Battlefield 2142 and get ads.

      Ads increase profit for companies, they never decrease the price of products, except those offered for free (like Google.)

  2. If it's actually tasteful, I wouldn't mind so much by Mad-cat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wouldn't mind a tasteful, text-only add in its own table that doesn't interrupt the flow of the text I'm reading. I would mind full-image or full-page ads.

    I suggest doing it the way authors like Terry Pratchett and Douglas Adams used footnotes. Put an asterisk, add a footnote advertisement, and make it funny and in context with the text. Then I might actually buy whatever crap they're hawking.

  3. Google itself can't find relevant ads for classics by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wondered what sorts of ads Google would put in Tom Sawyer. Cave tours? Paint companies? Anatomy textbooks? But I see that Google itself offers no paid links when I search on "Tom Sawyer."

    I wondered what sorts of ads Google would put in "The Pit and the Pendulum." Rat poison? Grandfather clocks? Surcingles... whatever a surcingle is? But I see that Google itself offers no paid links when I search on "The Pit and the Pendulum."

    "To Kill a Mockingbird?" No paid links. "Gargantua and Pantagruel?" No paid links. "Lolita?" No paid links.

    Inserting relevant advertising into books may be sooner said than done.

    --

    "How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!

  4. Ads in books? by A+Pancake · · Score: 4, Funny

    Reading books with ads in them? No thanks. I'll be off to the pirate ba... shit.

  5. Attn: Amazon - BOOKS DO NOT HAVE ADS! by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I dont really ever remember seeing and advertisement in ANY BOOK I have ever purchased. I'm sorry Amazon. Blow it out your ass. I'll stick to paper backs rather than your greed infected E-book.