Slashdot Mirror


USPTO Lets Amazon Patent the "Social Networking System"

theodp writes "After shelling out a reported $90 million to buy PlanetAll in 1998, Amazon shuttered the site in 2000, explaining that 'it seemed really superfluous to have it running beside Friends and Favorites.' But years later in a 2008 patent filing, Amazon described the acquired PlanetAll technology to the USPTO in very Facebook-like terms. And on Tuesday, the USPTO issued US Patent No. 7,739,139 to Amazon for its invention, the Social Networking System, which Amazon describes thusly: 'A networked computer system provides various services for assisting users in locating, and establishing contact relationships with, other users. For example, in one embodiment, users can identify other users based on their affiliations with particular schools or other organizations. The system also provides a mechanism for a user to selectively establish contact relationships or connections with other users, and to grant permissions for such other users to view personal information of the user. The system may also include features for enabling users to identify contacts of their respective contacts. In addition, the system may automatically notify users of personal information updates made by their respective contacts.' So, should Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg worry about Amazon opening a can of patent whup-ass?"

9 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. It's not just a bad patent system by jmerlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it appears that the declining quality of education in this country is reaching all the way to the patent registrars themselves. What a fine example of stupidity and.. dare I say.. incredible ignorance we have here. Honestly, who the hell hasn't heard of Facebook? Where do they find these people?

    1. Re:It's not just a bad patent system by skine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Facebook came afterward, then Facebook is not prior art.

      More importantly, the USPTO seems to allow patents on whatever hasn't been patented before, regardless of whether it should be patented.

      Honestly, I don't think this is the failure of the registrars, but a serious defect in the system that such a simple idea as social networking is patentable.

    2. Re:It's not just a bad patent system by Qzukk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If Facebook came afterward, then Facebook is not prior art.

      The patent was filed in 2008. It literally looks like something that might have been written in 2000 and sat around in the bottom of a desk drawer for years before someone found it and mailed it in. Hell, it cites Palm Pilot, Lotus Notes, and the Internet White Pages as prior art, and nothing since!

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  2. While I don't by al0ha · · Score: 3, Insightful

    agree with most patents like these, as long as it was awarded I personally would not at all mind seeing some cash rich entity open a can of whup-ass on Zuckerberg, at the very least it would be some form of karmic payback for stealing ( as is alleged) the Facebook idea from the students who hired him to help them. Cheating is one way to win at business, but not at life and I will never applaud a cheat, regardless of apparent success.

    --
    Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
  3. This is broken by karlssberg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Software patents are clearly a huge mistake. The US should never have allowed them. They are costing business in the US a fortune and do nothing to protect the little guy inventor with the next idea that will change the world. They are simply a tax on innovation and must be stopped immediately.

  4. Re:Patent Trolling by blair1q · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's why they're in patent trolling instead.

  5. Re:Love it! by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most likely, they'll just hold on to it and claim it's value.

    No, they'll hold onto it for cross-licensing purposes. The next time a business operating a service that vaguely qualifies as social networking tries to sue Amazon, Amazon plays this card. That's what patents mean to companies like Amazon: they're playing cards in a hand to prevent losing an expensive game. In a pinch Amazon could use it to extract licensing fees, but that's probably not their immediate intent.

  6. Re:Patent Trolling by Gr8Apes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It looks like the buyout by Amazon does predate Friendster and MySpace... though to be honest, there's no way in hell this should pass any "obvious" test.

    None of that matters. They didn't file until 2008. Therefore... anything existing before 2008 is prior art.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  7. Re:Filed in 2008? Are they serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which is, BTW, the real problem: you can file a patent application and keep rewriting it for a decade or more until somebody comes up with the same idea. Then you tweak the language to match perfectly and collect big-ass cash money. Software patents may be stupid, but the rules that allow this are Sarah-Palin-retarded.