Amazon Seeks 1-Nod Ordering Patent

theodp writes "Amazon.com is famous for its patented 1-Click ordering system. But what about 1-Nod ordering? Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is seeking a patent on a system that would let people make purchases with a nod, a smile, or even a raise of the eyebrow. Bezos' invention — 'Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism' — envisions a computing device that could interpret certain facial expressions and enhance or potentially replace conventional input devices such as keypads and touch screens."

Comments

Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[cjonslashdot]

I thought that simply automating a non-automated process is not sufficient to obtain a patent. At many auctions one can bid simply with a nod.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[heson]

My first thought was Paddington at the auktion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTQplC5E2zk

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Yvanhoe]

I am not a software patent or even patent advocate (they are all evil and stifle innovation) but...

I thought that simply automating a non-automated process is not sufficient to obtain a patent.

You are talking about robotics here. Of course that automating a manual process deserves a patent. That doesn't make it automatically innovating but replacing a human task by an automatic process is often a non trivial process.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[cjonslashdot]

Exactly. It is non-trivial to implement such automation. And therefore the mere idea should not be sufficient for a patent. The Patent Office is allowing companies to patent these "mere ideas".

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[nurb432]

True, but when was the last time the PO did their job?

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Yvanhoe]

100% with you on this.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Would not the Natal system be a means to this???

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Theaetetus]

I thought that simply automating a non-automated process is not sufficient to obtain a patent. At many auctions one can bid simply with a nod.

But the application isn't claiming:

A method for ordering stuff, the method comprising:
nodding to place an order.

If so, you'd have good prior art there. But that's not it. Instead, they're claiming:

1. A method of interacting with a graphical user interface on a portable computing device, comprising:
obtaining a first image using an imaging element of the portable computing device, the first image including a facial feature of a user of the portable computing device;
obtaining a second image using the imaging element, the second image including the facial feature of the user of the portable computing device;analyzing the obtained first image and second image, with the portable computing device, to determine a change in the position of the facial feature of the user with respect to the portable computing device; and
altering information displayed within the graphical user interface based at least in part on the determined change, wherein the information displayed within the graphical user interface excludes a representation of either or both of the obtained first and second images.

I'll admit that I've never been to a live auction, but I don't think the auctioneer is using an imaging element of a portable computing device to obtain multiple images and then analyzing a change in position of a facial feature.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[tsm_sf]

I'll admit that I've never been to a live auction, but I don't think the auctioneer is using an imaging element of a portable computing device to obtain multiple images and then analyzing a change in position of a facial feature.

Not only is he doing it, he's doing it in real time.

But if you're looking for prior art, look no further than Rainbows End, which envisions a world of crap like this.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[cjonslashdot]

Thank you for researching this.

From the excerpt that you provided, their "method" sounds an awful lot like an algorithm to me, and algorithm's are not patentable. So perhaps there should be a class action against all business method patents, since many of them - perhaps all? - might constitute algorithms.

Perhaps business method patents are a sham, because they are simply too easy to come up with. As such, as a class, I think that they do not meet the requirement for non-obviousness.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Hotawa Hawk-eye]

I'll admit that I've never been to a live auction, but I don't think the auctioneer is using an imaging element of a portable computing device to obtain multiple images and then analyzing a change in position of a facial feature.

What is the human brain but a portable computing device? And it's not much of a stretch in my opinion to see a person's body language as a sort of GUI (raises two fingers, mouths the word "beer" to the bartender, and points to the bar in front of himself.)

But Amazon will be happy with all the people who flip off their site and inadvertently purchase something from it.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Theaetetus]

Thank you for researching this.

From the excerpt that you provided, their "method" sounds an awful lot like an algorithm to me, and algorithm's are not patentable.

Not exactly... Algorithms alone are not patentable. Algorithms that are tied to a machine are patentable.

So perhaps there should be a class action against all business method patents, since many of them - perhaps all? - might constitute algorithms.

Nope. Sovereign immunity. The USPTO is immune from lawsuits.

Perhaps business method patents are a sham, because they are simply too easy to come up with.

That's a different question. There are three questions to ask when applying for a patent:
1) is the invention patentable subject matter?
2) is the invention new?
3) is the invention non-obvious?

If business methods are too easy, then they're obvious, so they fail question three. But that doesn't rule out some new, nonobvious business method. The question in Bilski and others is "is a business method that is new and not obvious still not patentable, simply because it's a business method?"

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[Theaetetus]

What is the human brain but a portable computing device? And it's not much of a stretch in my opinion to see a person's body language as a sort of GUI (raises two fingers, mouths the word "beer" to the bartender, and points to the bar in front of himself.)

I do, since the patent application defines a computing device, and the definition doesn't include "human brain".

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[nacturation]

I thought that simply automating a non-automated process is not sufficient to obtain a patent.

So if I develop an automated brain surgeon, that should not be eligible for patent protection?

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions?

[cjonslashdot]

You are right that an automated brain surgeon would be patentable.

But such an automated system (machine) would have to be far more than a merely programming of the "steps". A brain surgeon has skill. Such skill is not automatablbe by simply programming the steps. Surgery takes judgment, experience, true knowledge, and coordination. Such a machine would be revolutionary.

The requirement that a process not merely be an automation of steps means that, for example, one should not be able to patent the process of sorting a set of names. On the other hand, a special machine that is expressly designed for that purpose would be patentable. The gray area is whether a programmed general purpose machine is such a special purpose machine. I would think not, because in a programmed general purpose machine (i.e., an ordinary computer) the uniqueness is only in its programming, which is a mere coding of the algorithm of sorting, which is not patentable.

This has been reaffirmed in some recent court cases (e.g., the widely reported Bilski case, which is currently being reviewed by the Supreme Court), yet the Patent Office continues to issue these inappropriate patents.

Meh.

[NoPantsJim]

Sounds overbearing, but how many people (myself included) have thought "Damn, wish I had patented that 10-15 years before it hit the market"?

Re:Meh.

[Zumbs]

Don't patents only last 10-15 years? Or maybe that is your point?

Re:Meh.

[NoPantsJim]

I thought it was 17 years? Wikipedia to the rescue...

Re:Meh.

[Theaetetus]

I thought it was 17 years? Wikipedia to the rescue...

20 from the date of filing of the application. However, if you claim the benefit of an earlier application, then it's 20 years from the date of filing of that earlier application.

What will be next?

[PerformanceDude]

1-frown refund?

I'd like to see that... Now where is that patent application form?

Re:What will be next?

[Anne_Nonymous]

I'm writing a one fart review of this whole concept.

Re:What will be next?

[alex-tokar]

What we need is a 1-frown patent denial system.

Re:What will be next?

[sycodon]

I suspect there will probably be a 1 hard on ordering system for porn.

Re:What will be next?

[mike260]

Parent post made me LOL but unfortunately an ad saw this, misinterpreted it, and I now own an IBM z10 mainframe.

I'd cry but I'm afraid that Amazon would notice.

Re:What will be next?

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as there's a 1-ejaculation system for knowing when to stop billing for streaming porn.

Re:What will be next?

[digitig]

Catch 22. Need the porn to get the hard-on, need the hard-on to get the porn...

Re:What will be next?

[maxwell demon]

The first one is free. The following orders will come automatically.

Re:What will be next?

[nurb432]

I'm sure the dude at demotivationals has that already. Now, don't you feel depressed? Go buy a T-shirt.

Re:What will be next?

[RevWaldo]

Facebook is looking to patent its 1-nod 'opt-in' system. Although they do have a version that relies on blinking.

.

Re:What will be next?

[Reziac]

Loop breaker: Viagra.

Re:What will be next?

[hedwards]

If I had mod point I'd mod you insightful. My first thought was that this could very easily cause people to order things that they didn't intend to order. Case in point, I was buying a book the other day and clicked the one click sale button, no pop up or any indication that I had just ordered something. Fortunately, I did indeed mean to buy it, but it's inherently bad design when you've got a one click transaction and it doesn't even give feed back that it's been pressed.

Re:What will be next?

[Anonymous Coward]

We shall truly find out if sex sells when sales of dictionaries with nude wimmin on the front cover go through the roof.

Re:What will be next?

[chgros]

It's not a bug, it's a feature.

Re:What will be next?

[Kitkoan]

1-frown refund?

I'd like to see that... Now where is that patent application form?

Hell, I'd love to see a middle-finger command to see a cheaper price if I feel the suggested one is way too much.

Re:What will be next?

[Anonymous Coward]

Brilliant riposte !!

Not exactly innovative.

[BiggerIsBetter]

He wants a patent on a centuries old auction bid technique? But on a computer? Whateva... besides, there must be plenty of published techniques for more generic movement-as-input already - it's been a popular research topic.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[cybereal]

He wants a patent on a centuries old auction bid technique? But on a computer?

This comment is exemplary of a common misconception in patents. They are not covering the results! They are covering the mechanism and methodology. The "machine" if you will. The patent would cover a specific method for interpreting/receiving/whatever the gesture and passing it along to the service so it would do the expected thing. There could be a thousand ways to do this, and thus, a thousand different patents that all accomplished the same thing, and that's okay. Reality is, there are usually only a handful of effective ways to accomplish tasks like these and so you end up with patent lawsuits, and preemptive licensing. Woo.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[Anonymous Coward]

So another software patent? Things like those should should put you on death row, just behind patent trolls and serial murderers.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[BiggerIsBetter]

This comment is exemplary of a common misconception in patents. They are not covering the results! They are covering the mechanism and methodology.

All well and good, but it's still pretty fricken obvious to those skilled in the art. Most of us would just think it's a bad idea right now until computer vision catches up to make it reliable.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[Rockoon]

All well and good, but it's still pretty fricken obvious to those skilled in the art.

If its so obvious.. then why this:

Most of us would just think it's a bad idea right now until computer vision catches up to make it reliable.

He explained to you what patents entail, and then you go on and confuse patents with results, again.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[mwvdlee]

I'm going to patent the "raise hand to bid" auction system... but on a computer!

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[BiggerIsBetter]

He explained to you what patents entail, and then you go on and confuse patents with results, again.

There is no confusion. My point is that it's a fricken obvious process just waiting for technology to catch up to make it a non-stupid process to implement (I could look at trends and go and patent some clever ways of flying to Mars, but until the scientists and engineers figure out how actually to do it...). What he needs is other people to do the hard work for him so he can leverage off their research. Call it good business if you like, but it still looks like patent trolling to me.

 

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

The problem here is that the patent *doesn't* describe the methods. I've read through most of it, and in large part it seems to consist of things like

E]In embodiments utilizing a Web server, the Web server can run any of a variety of server or mid-tier applications, including HTTP servers, FTP servers, CGI servers, data servers, Java servers, and business application servers. The server(s) also may be capable of executing programs or scripts in response requests from user devices, such as by executing one or more Web applications that may be implemented as one or more scripts or programs written in any programming language, such as Java.RTM., C, C# or C++, or any scripting language, such as Perl, Python, or TCL, as well as combinations thereof. The server(s) may also include database servers, including without limitation those commercially available from Oracle.RTM., Microsoft.RTM., Sybase.RTM., and IBM.RTM..

As you can see, there is no methodology described -- only a high-level description of software that *could* be used to facilitate the process. This patent contains no algorithms; only descriptions of component parts.

(Unfortunately I can't look at the images to see what they contain, as I refuse to install quicktime -- I don't want to deal with resetting all my defaults every time it updates.)

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[sjames]

Even worse, the process can so obviously go wrong it's become a sitcom trope. I can well imagine that a computerized system could bring that trope to life. Have one seizure and suddenly half of Amazon's inventory is being shipped to your house.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[Rockoon]

You still are confusing results with method.

I am entirely amazed that you can't tell the difference.

A real-world hands-on example is Apples Pinch-Zoom.

They have not patented zooming. They have not patented zooming with a touch interface. They have patented zooming by using a pinch gesture detected with a specific methodology.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[Theaetetus]

The problem here is that the patent *doesn't* describe the methods. I've read through most of it, and in large part it seems to consist of things like

E]In embodiments utilizing a Web server, the Web server can run any of a variety of server or mid-tier applications, including HTTP servers, FTP servers, CGI servers, data servers, Java servers, and business application servers. The server(s) also may be capable of executing programs or scripts in response requests from user devices, such as by executing one or more Web applications that may be implemented as one or more scripts or programs written in any programming language, such as Java.RTM., C, C# or C++, or any scripting language, such as Perl, Python, or TCL, as well as combinations thereof. The server(s) may also include database servers, including without limitation those commercially available from Oracle.RTM., Microsoft.RTM., Sybase.RTM., and IBM.RTM..

As you can see, there is no methodology described -- only a high-level description of software that *could* be used to facilitate the process. This patent contains no algorithms; only descriptions of component parts.

I don't know why you went to the one boilerplate section that was put in to overcome Bilski. The entire rest of the patent application describes algorithms and methodology.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoosh. Again.

Third time attempt to point out the flaw in the reasoning? The patent is (supposed to be) awarded to the guy who invents the "catch-up technology." And only to the specific techniques he comes up with to make it work. Anyone who figured out a different technique to make the same type of system work wouldn't (shouldn't, anyway) violate the patent. If such techniques were obvious the technology would already have caught up.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

I'm not seeing it - I'm seeing references to (and presumably diagrams of) existing technologies, but not algorithms for anything new.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[hedwards]

But software patents don't. Since Amazon doesn't have to disclose the methodology and code there's in effect just a patenting of the results. The patent on barbed wire was assigned to the inventor that gave the patent office the most detailed information about the innovation. Free energy machines are regularly debunked by the USPTO when they're built from the supplied plans and fail to work.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[hedwards]

Too bad you're going to have to pay me a fee for my patented being in the same room as the computer you're directly interacting with patent.

Re:Not exactly innovative.

[Anonymous Coward]

They are not covering the results! They are covering the mechanism and methodology.

I haven't read this patent, but all the software patents I've read cover billions of mechanisms and methodologies to the point that there is no method to solve a trivial problem left unpatented. In effect, they patent the results.

Oh FFS

[Anonymous Coward]

We get it. You want to patent ordering. Brick&mortar: Walmart. Everything else: Amazon. That's how you want it to be, right, Jeff? You're part of the reason why people are increasingly opposed to the whole concept of patenting.

Re:Oh FFS

[mwvdlee]

Sometimes I think that is exactly what Amazon wants.

They secretly hate the patent system and want to bring it down entirely by demonstrating how broken it is.

Only problem is; they didn't think it would go on this long and they're running out of stupid ideas.

Re:Oh FFS

[Anonymous Coward]

My barkeep has been implementing this technology for years. As long as I can still move, he seems to know what I want.

As for prior publication, check this out:

http://mirw09.offis.de/paper/Cocktail%20-%20Exploiting%20Bartenders%E2%80%99%20Gestures%20for%20Mobile%20Interaction.pdf

Why this is a classic bullshit patent

[Rogerborg]

Motion recognition is not new. The claimed "invention" here is purely the business use to which the recognised motion is put.

This is like if I invent the pen, and you then patent using a pen to sign a contract, or draw a doodle. Holy shit, you're a frikkin' genius!

Re:Why this is a classic bullshit patent

[griffjon]

Amazon patented that last year - http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/06/Amazon_patents_electronic_pen_technology_49100176.html (see patent here: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7,546,524.PN.&OS=PN/7,546,524&RS=PN/7,546,524 )

"An electronic input device such as an electronic pen is provided to annotate a paper document. The input device records an annotation and an image of human-comprehensible content in the document sufficient to identify the document and possibly a location in the document. The human-comprehensible content is used to locate a digital version of the document and determine a corresponding location of the annotation in the digital version of the document. A computer system such as a server system may receive and store the annotation in association with the digital version of the document. The server system may further augment the digital version of the document with the annotation and send the augmented version to an output device for display and/or printing."

1-Touch balls buy

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to buy when I touch my balls.

And if I have an erection I want to buy with fastest shipping method.

Re:1-Touch balls buy

[Skapare]

Nice! You just exposed the longest existing prior art in history ... based on how services are acquired in the oldest profession.

Re:1-Touch balls buy

[CrashandDie]

"Longest existing prior art" and "erection" in parent and grand parent. No doubt, this a discussion on /. about patents.

I wonder though, Skapare, how well do you know AC that you can assert he is indeed the longest?

Re:1-Touch balls buy

[Skapare]

With as many comments AC posts on /. everyone should know him well :-)

Re:1-Touch balls buy

[Anonymous Coward]

And if I flip the Amazon site the bird, I want it to close my account and cancel all pending purchases. Same results if I moon Amazon.

Online auctioning ?

[Anonymous Coward]

*Shrugs*

Re:Online auctioning ?

[night_flyer]

SOLD!

Re:Online auctioning ?

[fluch]

Profit!

What I have at http://en.swpat.org

[ciaran_o_riordan]

If this gets granted, the 1-click example shows that even if it's invalid, the review process is sometimes completely useful because takes so many years and often just results in narrowing the patent.

• Amazon's one-click shopping patent
• Invalidating harmful patents - takes years, mightn't work, might just narrow the patent
• Amazon's gift ordering patent - just basic info
• Amazon - just basic info

Re:What I have at http://en.swpat.org

[Theaetetus]

If this gets granted, the 1-click example shows that even if it's invalid, the review process is sometimes completely useful because takes so many years and often just results in narrowing the patent.

I know you think that's a typo, but it's not. The review process is useful because it results in narrowing the patent.

But it is on a *computer*

[dsginter]

The patent office will rubber-stamp anything obvious if it is done on a computer. The one-click patent is a wonderful example: for decades, bartenders have been taking a patron's credit card and setting it aside. This allows the patron to simply "run a tab" and order a beer with just one click of the finger. This can't be patented because it is obvious to everyone.

But, if you do it on a computer, you can patent it for some reason. The mind boggles.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa, you should patent that!

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[qubezz]

The beauty here: this is patenting the problem and not the solution.

Where are the code snippets, the algorithms to detect the motions, the heuristics to reject false positives in this patent application?

It would have been so much easier for Edison if he could patent the idea 'glass bulb that produces light when electricity flows through it', instead of actually showing that he could do it.

The USPTO seems to think that this is fine these days though - patenting an idea instead of an invention.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[westlake]

for decades, bartenders have been taking a patron's credit card and setting it aside. This allows the patron to simply "run a tab" and order a beer with just one click of the finger

The "one click shopper" isn't running up a tab.

He has submitted an order which may be billed and shipped within minutes.

The bartender has his single keg of beer to mind and perhaps a dozen customers at the bar.

Amazon, twenty warehouses in ten states. 27 million cataloged items in books alone. Quarterly sales around $5 billion dollars.

Try keeping track of all that in your head.

 

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[westlake]

It would have been so much easier for Edison if he could patent the idea 'glass bulb that produces light when electricity flows through it', instead of actually showing that he could do it.

The patent office hasn't required a physical model - a "working model" - since 1880. The sole remaining exception is the perpetual motion machine.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[HungryHobo]

so if you do it on a computer and big then it's special?

It wasn't a patent on some kind of new system which allowed stock control and shipping over twenty warehouses in ten states, 27 million cataloged items in books alone, Quarterly sales around $5 billion dollars etc etc etc

they patented the idea of being able to order what you want with a click.

my local bartended knows my usual, I can sit down with some friends, catch his eye and perhaps catch his attention with a click and he'll deliver my order to me a few minutes later.

just doing something on a computer or with more people does not magically make it origional.

and where's the code in those patent applications?
without the code all you have is a general idea, not an innovative invention.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[davester666]

This means your bartender owes Amazon a nickle every time you order something, because he enters that order into a computer...

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[kramerd]

One click and a bar tab are very different.

A bar tab identifies one patron with multiple purchases in advance to all be paid at some future period.

One click identifies the information related to a patron so that individual purchases can be made at any time, however those purchases must be paid for when ordered.

The idea of the bar tab has so much prior art it isn't funny. For obvious examples, see farmers, who buy seed, fertilizer, farming equipment, etc, every season and don't have to pay for it until they have earned the money to do so (however, if they can't pay for long enough, they can 'lose the farm'). Something being obvious, in and of itself, is not reason to disallow a patent (at least not according to the patent office).

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[Anonymous Coward]

But I didn't know you could patent vaporware.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[Theaetetus]

and where's the code in those patent applications? without the code all you have is a general idea, not an innovative invention.

So you're saying you couldn't look at a flow chart and easily write code to implement it? There's no need for specific code, because the flow chart and description should be enough for someone of ordinary skill in the art. Additionally, if you did include specific code in, say, C+, then some idiot would claim that if they wrote it in C# that their version doesn't infringe on your patent.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[HungryHobo]

absolutely not.

For the traditional car analogy:

You can innovate your way around a patent on a specific brake design.

There is no way to innovate your way around a box in a flowchart reading [slows car down]

there IS need for specific code because otherwise you don't have a specific invention.

"then some idiot would claim that if they wrote it in C# that their version doesn't infringe on your patent."

And if you specify iron parts then some idiot might build it out of steel and claim that it doesn't infringe on your patent.

Flowcharts in patents rather than code are pure unadulterated bullshit.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[Theaetetus]

absolutely not.

For the traditional car analogy:

You can innovate your way around a patent on a specific brake design.

There is no way to innovate your way around a box in a flowchart reading [slows car down]

First, that wasn't the question. The question was "So you're saying you couldn't look at a flow chart and easily write code to implement it?" and it was in response your complaint that there was no code there. Now, you're moving the goalposts to "I want to see the code there so that I can innovate around it..."

Which brings me to the second point. You know how I said "then some idiot would claim that if they wrote it in C# that their version doesn't infringe on your patent"? It's the same as if someone said "well, if I build my transmission gearbox out of steel instead of iron, I haven't infringed your gearbox patent." But no one's that stupid.

And if you specify iron parts then some idiot might build it out of steel and claim that it doesn't infringe on your patent.

Uh...

Flowcharts in patents rather than code are pure unadulterated bullshit.

Just because you apparently can't read and understand flowcharts sufficiently enough to implement them in code doesn't mean that one who is skilled as a programmer couldn't. Patents aren't written for laymen - they're written for those of ordinary skill in the relevant industry.

Re:But it is on a *computer*

[HungryHobo]

"So you're saying you couldn't look at a flow chart and easily write code to implement it?"
how deep is the ocean.

sure if it's the kind of ultra specific flowchart that are possible with some of the UML tools then sure, the chart itself could be compiled in which case it would be an implementation.
If you can feed your flowchart into an interpreter and get out working code or a binary, no problem.

If on the other hand you just want to patent the general idea dressed up with a useless flowchart that lacks the detail to actually implement it (in which case we hit [slows car down] land again)

"But no one's that stupid."
there's your answer to the challenge that someone might just implement it in another language if you included actual real code.

I'm quite capable of reading and understanding flowcharts, I'm just well aware that the world is full of con artists who think a vague flowchart is anything more than a vague idea.

only in US

[Anonymous Coward]

How nice that he will get this patent only in the US, but not in Europe !

It's been done before...

[FoboldFKY]

To quote Douglas Adams from one of the HHGTTG books (forget which one; it's the one involving the Krikkit):

"Let us bow our heads in payment."

Re:It's been done before...

[Derek Pomery]

Slartibartfast floated past, waving.

``It's just a documentary,'' he called out. ``This is not a good bit. Terribly sorry, trying to find the rewind control ...''

``... is what billions of billions of innocent ...''

``Do not,'' called out Slartibartfast floating past again, and fiddling furiously with the thing that he had stuck into the wall of the Room of Informational Illusions and which was in fact still stuck there, ``agree to buy anything at this point.'' ... [SNIP SNIP SNIP] ...

Slartibartfast floated past again at this moment.

``Found it,'' he said. ``We can lose all this rubbish. Just don't nod, that's all.''

``Now, let us bow our heads in payment,'' intoned the voice, and then said it again, much faster and backwards.

Say no more . . . some bloke in the pub . . .

[PolygamousRanchKid]

. . . was bothering me the other night "with a nod, a smile or even a raise of the eyebrow." And his inquiries if my wife was interested in "candid photography."

Was he infringing on Amazon's patent?"

Re:Say no more . . . some bloke in the pub . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

...raise of the eyebrow...

That's because Vulcans don't smile

Re:Say no more . . . some bloke in the pub . . .

[d'baba]

A common misperception. This was, in fact, a copyright violation and not a patent infringement. Unless, of course, it involved a penguin, which is, as yet, not copyrightable.
(I'm aghast that my spellchecker allows 'copyrightable')

Lazy eye

[Anonymous Coward]

What will it do when presented with a lazy eye?

a raised eyebrow or smile?

[ed.han]

apparently, you should no longer shop while browsing p40n!

More procedure pretending to be process.

[Anonymous Coward]

In the meantime, nobody can possibly infringe on this mess.

" Two such cases that have found that a party cannot be liable for direct
infringement because the party did not perform all the steps are Fromson v. Advance
Offset Plate, Inc., 720 F.2d 1565, 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (finding no direct infringement
by manufacturer who performed the first step of a process claim even where its
customer performed the other step of the claim) and Cross Medical Products, 424 F.3d
at 1311 (rejecting patentees’ efforts to combine the acts of surgeons with those of a
medical device manufacturer to find direct infringement of an apparatus claim)."

The non-method claims are, as typical for the State Street family of junk patents, a laundry list of pre-existing elements not specifically used to carry out the limited activity of the alleged procedure relegated to a "machine". All in all, another non-contribution to the useful arts and sciences, claiming gesture recognition technologies never contributed to by the alleged inventor by the allegation of applicability without even carrying out the work necessary to apply the prior art.

Bilski will certainly uphold this kind of junk patent and assure that the population of petty IP tyrants will grow and flourish.

Auction house procedures?

[davidwr]

Be careful when raising that eyebrow the next time you are at an auction!

My simple motion ...

[Anonymous Coward]

is the raised middle digit.

Re:My simple motion ...

[maxwell demon]

is the raised middle digit.

Thank you for ordering four items using our new digital order technology.

The force (of lies) is strong on the weak minded..

[Anonymous Coward]

(1)... Buy a 1-Nod Patent, cost a few thousand.

(2)... Tell world about it.

(3)... Media writes stories about 1-Click Patent and how 1-Nod Patent won't work. (Media don't care it doesn't work, they get attention from talking about the news).

(4)... Amazon Profit ... from large increase in web traffic from a very obvious PR stunt story to get Amazon more press attention.

(5)... Laugh at every fool on Slashdot who fails to see through it and so takes this PR stunt seriously. :)

Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism

[PatPending]

United States Patent Application 20100125816 MOVEMENT RECOGNITION AS INPUT MECHANISM

From the claims, it looks like it is limited to a portable computing device:

1. A method of interacting with a graphical user interface on a portable computing device, comprising:obtaining a first image using an imaging element of the portable computing device, the first image including a facial feature of a user of the portable computing device;obtaining a second image using the imaging element, the second image including the facial feature of the user of the portable computing device;analyzing the obtained first image and second image, with the portable computing device, to determine a change in the position of the facial feature of the user with respect to the portable computing device; andaltering (sic) information displayed within the graphical user interface based at least in part on the determined change, wherein the information displayed within the graphical user interface excludes a representation of either or both of the obtained first and second images.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism

[PatPending]

Ah, I now see that later claims (e.g., 18 and 31) use "a computing device" so it's not limited to a portable computing device.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism

[Arker]

What's clear is that they have no invention here, they are simply staking out a prospective monopoly so that in case someone actually does build such a device in the future, Amazon will own it. This is what our patent system has become.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism

[Dachannien]

From an obviousness standpoint, that's not really interesting. A laptop is portable, for instance.

The "wherein" clause at the end is pretty amusing, though, and it actually makes it harder to reject the claim using, for example, a security surveillance system.

It should also be noted that the claims don't really have any specifics about e-commerce. They're claiming a scope that more generally encompasses any facial-feature-based input device.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you could easily kill this one with prior art. Eye-tracking as an input method is quite old.

my typo s/useful/useless/

[ciaran_o_riordan]

the review process is sometimes completely useful

Carp. That should read "useless". My subconscious is just so positive.

Re:my typo s/useful/useless/

[PatPending]

the review process is sometimes completely useful

Carp. That should read "useless". My subconscious is just so positive.

s/Carp/Crap/

Re:my typo s/useful/useless/

[daeglo]

Have you ever smelled a carp? After it has been lying on the sandy beach of a warm lake for a day or two? I think the OP meant carp. Carp aptly describes today's patent system.

"Carp are known to invade lakes and ponds leading the native aquatic wild to extinction. Once the native wildlife has deceased, the carp will then travel to another body of water to repeat the process" -- Wikipedia

Substitute carp for software patents and aquatic references for equivalent small business terms and the statement holds true.

------------------
+5 insightful for invalid wikipedia reference which nobody bothers to verify before modding
oh, wait I wasn't supposed to point that out

Re:my typo s/useful/useless/

[The_mad_linguist]

Or, you know, he plays Dwarf Fortress.

Unintended facial expressions ..

[Johan Welin]

I wouldn't dare to use a site using this system. Just imagine what you would 'buy' whenever you've got a cold ..

WWSWHD?

[thijsh]

... make purchases with a nod, a smile or even a raise of the eyebrow ...

I want to bet this system will be so sensitive it will lead to a lot of 'purchases', which will be defended in court with reasoning along the lines of: "our patented method can even detect the body language of subconscious wants and needs with over 99% accuracy, which is a higher success rate than our patented 'one click buy' button which has a slightly higher error rate because of accidental clicks."

>>> FAST FORWARD >>>

Year 2042 history books describing the rise of the Amazon mega-conglomerate identify this patent as the most important one in Amazon's history:

This of course would lead to the infamous landmark lawsuit of Amazon VS Stephen Hawking who had an Amazon pop-up on his wheelchair-computer and accidentally ordered everything on Amazon.com by staring blankly at the screen...
The argument of SWH's lawyers that he could not possibly operate a Segway for lack of motor control and thus had no use for it - and did not want to order it - was refuted by the Amazon legal team because, according to them, "the lack of motor control gave him the strong subconscious urge to walk an do all the things a walking man can do, and thus order a Segway".

After losing this exhausting case Stephen commented: "One cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem, but it is clear that intelligence has no long-term survival value.".

This legal tactic that set a precedent causing a new advertising phenomenon called 'drive by shopping'. Every pop-up ad from Amazon now has a mandatory purchase when you look at it, because they can prove 'without a doubt' you *want* to purchase the items they sell using their unique patented method...

Re:WWSWHD?

[Anonymous Coward]

Stephen Hawking further remarked: “When one's expectations are reduced to zero, one really appreciates everything one does have”. I guess he wanted to order the Segway after all, just to look at it.

Re:WWSWHD?

[Anonymous Coward]

It matters if you just don't give up

Re:WWSWHD?

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I want to bet this system will be so sensitive it will lead to a lot of 'purchases',

Bender, in Sotheby's: "Bite my shiny metal ass!"

Sotheby's auctioneer: "Sold."

Bender: "The guy sitting next to me will pay."

Fry: "Huh? What?"

Re:WWSWHD?

[Reziac]

Drive-by (or should that be drive-buy) shopping:

Amazon's crack team of shopping specialists cruise the streets, taking orders from every gesture or grimace performed in every front yard and every living room in America. For added convenience, a shopping drone will penetrate those pesky closed-up rooms, ensuring that no shopper's fantasy goes unfilled!

Re:WWSWHD?

[kramerd]

Of course, you couldn't possibly turn off 1-smile purchasing :)

See, I don't have it on, so I didn't just buy anything.

Re:WWSWHD?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you do not wish to purchase The Sistine Chapel, please remain perfectly still without breathing for 12 minutes.

Opera ASA has prior art

[netux]

Introducing Opera Face Gestures

Re:Opera ASA has prior art

[PatPending]

Look at the dates:

Bezos filed on December 10, 2008 and the page you cited was dated April 1, 2009.

Re:Opera ASA has prior art

[thijsh]

You quoted the date but still missed the joke... you just lost 1 geek point my good sir!

Re:Opera ASA has prior art

[amentajo]

PatPending probably didn't miss the joke. Joke or not, the Opera link would have been a really good way to prove prior art if it were posted before the filing date.

Re:Opera ASA has prior art

[thijsh]

Do joke inventions count as prior art? I thought it would count as fiction... and just like science fiction is no prior art to some technological inventions this would just count as 'thanks for the idea, we worked with it and actually built something'.

But I guess my plan of using my house's 'fat pipe' for broadband is foiled by Google.

What's the point?

[Zouden]

Seriously, what's the point of this? Ordering things online is already easy. Does Bezos really think there's a whole untapped market out there of people who would like to buy something but find clicking links too exhausting? I wonder how those customers managed to navigate his website in the first place.

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, what's the point of this? Ordering things online is already easy. Does Bezos really think there's a whole untapped market out there of people who would like to buy something but find clicking links too exhausting? I wonder how those customers managed to navigate his website in the first place.

By thinking of their purchase and looking at the search box.

Re:What's the point?

[PatPending]

From the patent application:

BACKGROUND

[0002]As the variety of available computing devices increases, and as the size of many of these devices decreases, there comes a need to adapt the ways in which users interface with these computing devices. For example, while typing on a keyboard is an easy and acceptable way for many users to input information for a desktop computer, trying to enter information on a keyboard of a portable phone can be difficult due to the small form factor of the device. For example, the size of a user's fingers can prevent that user from easily pressing one key at a time. Further, as many of these devices move to touch screens or other such input devices, the size of a user's finger can also inhibit the user from successfully selecting an intended object or element on the screen, etc. Another disadvantage to using such touch screens is that fingerprints, dirt, smudges, and other remnants are left on the display screen, which can cause glare or other issues with clarity and/or visibility. Further, some users add an extra layer of protective material to prevent damage to the screen, but these devices can reduce touch sensitivity and amplify the negative effects of the residue left on the screen.

[0003]Further, many users prefer to use portable devices such as cellular phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), and electronic book reading devices with one hand, and such operation becomes difficult using a touch screen or multiple-button input approach. Even for stationary devices (e.g., desktop computers) the standard keyboard and mouse-based approach can be undesirable for users who would prefer to view information without having to constantly move the mouse and scroll to the next area, select elements to navigate to the next page, etc.

It's not my bag.

[saider]

We see by your expression that you really like this Swedish made penis enlarger. One has been ordered in your name. Additionally, we have posted a "like" on your Facebook page as well as posting a Twitpic on your twitter account. Please smile again if you would like to cancel this operation.

Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside

[Laxori666]

You are sipping a delicious coffee, sitting outside your favorite cafe. "Man," you say to yourself, "who would buy a set of bleachers on Amazon? $10,000! Hah!"

Presently, your friend Bob comes walking down the street. "Hey Bob!" you say, waving and nodding. Your browser starts loading a new page. "Purchase confirmed." DOH!!

Re:Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside

[maxwell demon]

You are sipping a delicious coffee, sitting outside your favorite cafe. "Man," you say to yourself, "who would buy a set of bleachers on Amazon? $10,000! Hah!"

Presently, your friend Bob comes walking down the street. "Hey Bob!" you say, waving and nodding. Your browser starts loading a new page. "Purchase confirmed." DOH!!

No need for Bob. Some offers are so unreasonable that they make you smile ...

Re:Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that, from now on, I'll browse internet wearing a Donald Duck mask, just in case...

Re:Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside

[Ksevio]

But you save $2,608.62 by buying it on Amazon so it's cool.

Haha, that's funny!

[Hermanas]

Oh @#!$, I just bought a Britney Spears teenage pregnancy collector's doll from the amazon landing page.

Re:Haha, that's funny!

[The Archon V2.0]

Oh @#!$, I just bought a Britney Spears teenage pregnancy collector's doll from the amazon landing page.

My kid moves his head to the music he's listening to and just bought the whole Internet.

Class action lawsuit possible?

[cjonslashdot]

I wonder if it would be possible to mount a class action lawsuit against the Patent Office, listing a volume of inappropriate software patents, and challenging them all based on the same allegation of incorrect application of patent case law. The plaintiffs could be the industry of software authors who are prevented from using the "methods" in these specious patents.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[buchner.johannes]

Please do that.

But you'll have to come up with a metric for "innovation", because the number of patents registered is what governments use today ... We know sucks, but come up with a better one.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[LowlyWorm]

Not only that... If everything online that causes me to raise an eyebrow is a purchase I am already broke.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[sjames]

If only that was the worst part. We can't even get the USPTO to look at nearly ubiquitous prior art, much less get it to actually require non-obviousness.

The one click patent is a perfect example. They managed to allow a patent on a process that had been in use in country stores for well over a century just because it was to be done with a computer rather than with index cards in a box behind the counter. I have to wonder what rock the examiner lives under that he wouldn't have been aware of that.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[fishexe]

Yes!
But the plaintiff class should be all the computer users in the world who are prevented from having useful software.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[Known Nutter]

You could, expect I just got patent for "method of mounting a class action lawsuit against the Patent Office"

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[FatdogHaiku]

Or worse, you sneeze and a semi-truck full of stuff shows up at your house the next day, along with some debt collection people...

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[PopeRatzo]

If everything online that causes me to raise an eyebrow is a purchase I am already broke.

If you've got Parkinson's Disease, this could get really expensive.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[Anonymous Coward]

Governments should be more worried about showing a strong economy with a stable currency. The United States' dollar has lost 95% of its value in the last 100 years, and shows no signs of slowing down. I wonder if that is Why China wants it pulled as a world reserve currency since it is now junk. Doesn't matter how many patents you have if you just suffered hyperinflation. =)

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[aix tom]

Or have a cat that decides to sink claws into you while you look at that $10,000 gadget.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[gyrogeerloose]

If you've got Parkinson's Disease, this could get really expensive.

I'm thinking about a friend of mine who's got mild-to-moderate Tourette's syndrome (I am not making this up). He could go broke in a matter of minutes.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible?

[Anonymous Coward]

But your patent overlaps my prior patent for "method of mounting a class action lawsuit against government agencies."

Prior Art!

[brianc]

Prior Art

Re:Prior Art!

[maxwell demon]

That's missing the vital part: "with a computer"

the inadvertant

[Anonymous Coward]

You send a wink and a nod to your audio/video chat friend and Amazon thinks it should send you a half-dozen used Apple II's. Whatever you do, don't scratch!!!

Re:This Presidency was supposed to be competent...

[Anonymous Coward]

And we should listen to someone who can't even spell "Obama". Foam at the mouth more; it's cute.

Patentabilty aside... who wants this?

[DeadPanDan]

Don't move your head. Don't twitch. Just stare straight ahead. Keep staring at the screen. What a nightmare. The only possible use for this that I can imagine is for accessibility of the disabled, but there are solutions for that already.

Nothing new here

[Cornwallis]

Didn't Rob and Laura Petrie get suckered by this during an auction 45 years ago?

'Eight stroke' option could work...

[Robotron23]

for porn sites. They'd know we weren't just passing through.

2-click patent

[orthicviper]

i always wondered why amazon didn't patent a 2-click and 3-click ordering system to really stick it to barnes and noble

I can see it now!

[War Camel]

Amazon's next patent: A means to cause a person to sneeze when viewing their products.

Re:I can see it now!

[maxwell demon]

Or they patent writing a joke next to their offers ... who said that there was no money in writing jokes?

However we will have to unlearn that a smile costs you nothing.

Prior Art

[MichaelJ]

I can't believe that in this crowd nobody has yet mentioned this one:

"This is a remarkable replica, hand-tooled by skilled craftsmen, lovingly assembled using ancient craft secrets into a memento you will be proud to own, in memory of those who fell, and in tribute to the Galaxy — our Galaxy — which they died to defend"
Slartibartfast floated past again at this moment.
"Found it," he said, "We can lose all this rubbish. Just don't nod, that's all."
"Now let us bow our heads in payment," intoned the voice.

Douglas Adams, from Life, the Universe, and Everything.

Re:Prior Art

[maxwell demon]

I can't believe that in this crowd nobody has yet mentioned this one:

Nor can I.

Re:Prior Art

[MichaelJ]

Despite what the timestamps say, they weren't there when I searched just prior to posting. Twice.

Access to webcam while browsing?

[DeadPanDan]

I wonder if they would use this webcam access for other purposes as long as it's available. Where is the customer looking? For how long? What's their facial expression? Is she hot or not? What's she wearing?

Nod system....that's a "great" idea!

[DeepEye]

"Your Honor, my client suffers from Parkinson's and he did not order 1.2 million pieces of Depend underwear pads from Amazon"

Suggested prior art

[Anonymous Coward]

In patents, it's just the claims that count (that's what the monopoly is on).

For most of the claims, the "Mind Reading Machines" display at the Royal Society Summer Exhibition 2006, and associated papers from University of Cambridge, seems like prior art. It analysed facial expressions to infer affective state, charting estimates (on the user interface) of how likely it was that the user was expressing interest, confusion, etc. (So, lots of changing the UI based on analysing video images and motion of parts of someone's face, threshholds, etc)

Various eye-tracking devices seem like prior art for other claims. For instance, there are plenty of applications for controlling a mouse or selecting text via eye-tracking.

A publication from Japan, which detected a user moving his gaze from one screen to another and highlighted the mouse location on the destination screen, seems to be prior art for a few of the ones that use the orientation with respect to the device.

It's quite possible that later "dependent claims" down the list might get through -- but they are likely to be so constrained as to have little effect.

whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

you> *yawn*
amazon> congratulations on purchasing your new non-refundable motor home
you> FUCK!
amazon> thank you for purchasing "bad boys on the beach 7"
you> NOOO!
amazon> no results found for "naked little boys"
you> *close window*
you> FUUUUUUCK!

I'm going to patent

[bmo]

I'm going to patent making obvious claims in patents. And then I am never going to license it.

"Oh, let's patent auction signals with a computer, because, it's a COMPUTER"

It's a good thing Jeff wasn't in charge of building the first computers. We'd still be supplicating to the high priests of ENIAC to please run our computations, pretty please, and we'll get you coffee.

Maybe someone should patent "Impacting the face of Jeff Bezos with a rectilinear lump of fired red clay" and implement it.

--
BMO

Oh, I forsee a lot of return packets

[Opportunist]

Amazon: Here's a few suggestions based on your previous choices.
Customer: Huh? What's that? (click)
Amazon: A huge horse dildo because you ordered a My Little Pony Video
Customer (eyes go wide) what the ...
Amazon: Thank you for your order.

Hasn't this already been done?

[jimicus]

Wasn't there something like this in one of the Hitchhikers' Guide books?

Re:Hasn't this already been done?

[maxwell demon]

You almost got me to nod! Next time be more careful, or I'll send you the bill!

Re:Hasn't this already been done?

[safetyinnumbers]

Wasn't there something like this in one of the Hitchhikers' Guide books?

Yes I was thinking that.

I think that in one of the later HHGTTG books Arthur is shown a virtual reality movie (to get him up to speed on events) which turns out to be just an infomercial. He's warned "Do not nod your head at any point" and the infomercial presenter ends a pseudo-religious message with "now, let us bow our heads in payment".

When I read this, I thought it was a bit unlikely that they were unable to play the movie without it being interactive, but these days some people can't read their email without being online....

I sneezed and bought a table saw.

[Lime Green Bowler]

That is all.

A nod is as good as a wink

[Anonymous Coward]

Nudge nudge, wink wink

Say no more

A Company called DevExpress has prior art

[BradleyUffner]

Just watch their video!
http://tv.devexpress.com/#dxhelmet.movie

Re:A Company called DevExpress has prior art

[PatPending]

Unlike the previous post claiming this (Introducing Opera Face Gestures) as prior art, yours actually precedes Bezos' filing date by 44 days (Oct. 27, 2008 vs. Dec. 10, 2008).

Re:A Company called DevExpress has prior art

[PatPending]

I just noticed that his patent application claims an earlier priority date:

[0001]The present patent application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/116,430, to Bezos, entitled "MOVEMENT RECOGNITION AS INPUT MECHANISM," filed Nov. 20, 2008. The entire content of this provisional patent application is incorporated herein by reference.

Still, DevExpress preceded Bezos!

in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

In other news... Michael J. Fox has declared bankruptcy.

Is there a 'stupid' tag ?

[unity100]

there should be ... for this patent thing is really going towards that way.

How many things does a sneeze buy?

[Errol backfiring]

in the early days of speech recognition, I saw a demo where a sneeze was taken as a valid input word (the name of a train station). Is their implementation intelligent enough to see the difference between a nod and a hiccup?

My new patent

[russryan]

I'm about to file a patent for a "single finger rejection" method.

Re:My new patent

[Red_Chaos1]

I lol'd

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

A patent needs to be non-obvious to an expert in the field. However, when it comes to computers, everyone thinks they're an expert in the field. Car analogy: everyone thinks they're a good driver. Anyhow, people's raised opinions of their own ability plus patent lawyer obfuscation makes it trivial to get patents of the form "... with a microprocessor" and "... over the Internet."

With apologies...

[camperdave]

For years websites had been operated by means of pressing buttons and clicking mice; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive - you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you have to do is nod your head in the general direction of the computer and hope. It saves a lot of muscular expenditure of course, but means that you have to sit infuriatingly still if you want to keep reading the same website.

With apologies to Douglas Adams

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought that it was the opposite. An inventor is obliged to provide a working model if the patent office requests it. However, they aren't bothered about perpetual motion machines because it provides revenue and employment for a government department.

Great idea, no downsides

[noidentity]

I think this is a great idea. I don't see any down

Re:Great idea, no downsides

[noidentity]

Argh, sorry, I blinked my eye and my computer interpreted that as a Submit request. Anyway, I don't see any downsides to this. Sure, it might sometimes trigger acci

Another idea

[Anonymous Coward]

The porn industry needs to patent the "one stroke" to purchase method...

Only two people think this is brilliant

[Gax]

In other news, Paul McCartney and Will Smith receive a surprising sales boost to their back catalogue.

Quick, someone patent audio input...

[MikeV]

...and open-license it so we can make sure that we can still freely submit a purchase order by farting and burping without receiving a C&D letter.

Re:This Presidency was supposed to be competent...

[daeglo]

Humour lately?

Jeff Bozos

[billcopc]

FTS:

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is seeking attention

FTFY.

Head Bangers are going to have massive Problems

[PDX]

Head Bangers are going to have massive problems. Your rocking to the music and Amazon just filled your shopping cart with bunch of stuff. Would you like to pay now nod for yes. Processing payment Your Visa credit card # XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-9955 has been charged $12,792.63

Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Baahd idea, sheeple.
Besides, there is prior art at auctions.

The 0-click shopping is even better!

[Vegard]

0-click-shopping: Buy something *unless* you press a button :)

Re:The 0-click shopping is even better!

[TedRiot]

There's prior art!

crumbs are crumbs

[ciaran_o_riordan]

Ok, but waiting (and working) years for a single patent to be reviewed, and then only a portion gets invalidated?

I know it's better than nothing, but crumbs are crumbs.

Re:crumbs are crumbs

[Theaetetus]

Ok, but waiting (and working) years for a single patent to be reviewed, and then only a portion gets invalidated?

I know it's better than nothing, but crumbs are crumbs.

Yes, but only a portion of it gets invalidated because the part that remains, having been examined twice, with tons of prior art submitted by anti-patent people such as yourself, survived both of those examinations and is new and non-obvious over all of that prior art. In which case, it should survive. Why should we be invalidating patents that can live up to that much public scrutiny?

Re:crumbs are crumbs

[Draek]

Because they haven't been shown to be beneficial to society at large versus not granting anything to begin with, particularly when in the time it took you to narrow down a single patent to a not-so-harmful form a thousand others have slipped you by.

Do Not Want

[Daetrin]

I already steer clear of the "1 click" option on Amazon. Not only is it something that never should have been patentable, but it's not even a "service" i want to use. If i don't want something enough to go through the usual purchasing process it's really not worth it. I don't need Amazon encouraging me to spend on a whim.

"1-nod" is an even worse idea. People might end up buying something just because of a "smile or even a raise of the eyebrow"? If Amazon actually managed to convince a lot of people to sign up for that service than purchases of items like this would skyrocket.

Free Patent idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm... will Amazon collect royalties that exceed the cost of the patent application from the USPO once they get the USPO nod?

A nigger needs to rape Jeff bezos

[Anonymous Coward]

seriously jeff, i hope a nigger with a 12 inch dong sodomizes you

Star Trek

[mhollis]

Spock: (Raising eyebrow) "Fascinating Captain -- Oh, darn!"

A large thankyou

[Twinbee]

It's great to see the people behind this patent push and the original creator/s of the idea are making such a positive, wide-reaching impact on the world with exciting, unique and creative flashes of genius such as the One Nod Purchase (tm)(tm). The world would indeed be a poorer, empty, purposeless wasteland without their insights (and insights like them).

I wish them all the best. No really.

THANKYOU AMAZON SMILEY/NODDY/HAPPY TEAM. (Much hugs - your no. 1 fan.)

How is this better?

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems to me that "setting a password of movements" such as three nods up, three nods down, smile, then raise eyebrows consumes a heck of a lot more energy than simply clicking on the "BUY" button. How is this an improvement?

Yeahhhhhh My Anus is Uranus.

[dogzdik]

So what happens when you pull a face to fart? 3,000 items in a single purchase?

Ars prior!

[Anonymous Coward]

I call prior art: Caligula already invented this way back around 40 AD. He famously bankrupted a senator by drawing the auctioneers attention to the fact that the senator was quite literally nodding off, and therefore entering an absurdly high bid on each item being sold.

So, new slogan for amazon: We're inventive, like Caligula!

(captcha? Merciful... LOL!)