Amazon Patents Bad Gift Protection

theodp writes "Thanks to the inventors at Amazon.com, you needn't fear Aunt Martha any longer. On Tuesday, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos received a patent for a bad gift defense system that intercepts gifts you don't want and instead sends you something that you actually do want. For example, Amazon explains that its 'System and Method for Converting Gifts' would allow you to set up a rule like 'Convert all gifts from Aunt Mildred,' which would automatically convert any online gift orders from your well-meaning-but-tasteless Auntie into a gift certificate. Other examples of how the system might be used: You could convert bad gifts to something off your wish list; block specific products ('Not another XYZ comic strip calendar'); or ensure that any clothing gifts match your exact size ('Check clothes sizes first')."

Comments

Automatic? Just let me know.

[chemicaldave]

Instead of trying to make an educated guess about what I would or would not want, just let me know beforehand that you might have an order coming to me that I don't want. Then let me decide if I want it in gift certificate form.

Re:Automatic? Just let me know.

[hodet]

....or how about not being a spoiled brat and accepting Aunt Mildreds gift with a little gratitude and respect. There is a saying, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth".

Re:Automatic? Just let me know.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or how about not giving gifts to people in the first place simply because the calendar said to?

I only give gifts to small children on birthdays and Christmas. Everybody else gets them when I find something they might like - regardless of what day it is.

Re:Automatic? Just let me know.

[Locke2005]

I've got a better idea. Every year, let's mutually agree on an amount, say $20. I'll mail you a check for $20, and you mail me a check for $20, then we can both go out and buy exactly what we want!

Re:Missing Skill

[chemicaldave]

Oh really?

Isn't this illegal under consumer protection laws?

[WillAffleckUW]

Under commerce laws, a contract is signed between a consumer and a company to perform a service.

The NON-action of that service - the unwanted gift ORDERED and PAID FOR by the consumer Aunt Milly - is a direct and actionable defrauding of service and a contractual BREACH by Amazon.

I smell a massive consumer lawsuit that Amazon will lose.

Amazon enters into the contract to deliver the goods and services specified. They are the AGENT of Aunt Milly.

Anything other than a good-faith effort to fulfill that contract is an act of FRAUD.

Re:How about...

[falsified]

Not (really) obvious, no prior art, kind of a cool idea. I kind of think patents for things that aren't physical objects are BS, but if we're going to allow them at all, then this seems like one we should allow.

"With a Computer"

[FranTaylor]

It's just like fortune cookies.

Append "in bed" and you get a laugh.

Append "with a computer" and you get a software patent.

I understand the concept

[OzPeter]

However I believe (IMHO) it is not solving the fundamental problem.

A gift from person A to person B should be a symbol saying "I know you, and I believe that you should have this gift I am giving you". If person B is not receiving a desired gift from person A then there are at least 2 issues at stake:

1. Person A doesn't really know Person B - in which case why are they obligated to send a gift, and whose fault is it for the lack of knowledge?
2. Person B does not care about Person A, and instead selfishly only wants the gifts that they want and as such ignores the feelings/beliefs of person A - in which case again, why are gifts being sent?

So the fundamental problem is the lack of a proper relationship between Person A and Person B, and that this patent application goes to weaken all such relationships by automatically sweeping the real issues under the electronic carpet.

Re:I understand the concept

[OzPeter]

Yeah, I just don't understand why it's not socially acceptable to just send people cash.

To me, the sending of cash is probably the rudest gift giving of all. It amounts to I am compelled to give you a gift but I don't know anything about you at all, so rather than be involved in your life and learning about your experiences I'll send this cash in the off chance that you will buy something for yourself and somehow link the emotion of that buying to me.

Re:I understand the concept

[jjhall]

I see cash gifts the other way. I have hobbies where the items I need for those hobbies is either expensive, obscure to the average bear, or both. The items that fall outside of those two categories I probably already have or there is a reason I don't already have it. Many of my relatives have started to just give me cash for gifts. At first it was prefaced with "I know it is impolite to give cash, but I know you've mentioned a Whizbang 6000 or some such doohickey and I don't even know where to get it. I figured this way you can get it yourself and make sure you get the right thing." I do the same thing to other relatives, such as my brother, who has no common hobby to me. I know he hunts with hounds, but I wouldn't know what call to get him, or know if a particular tracking collar will work with his particular tracker, if he already has an extra, or if it is better to buy from store B instead of store A because they have a longer return period in case it fails after the first couple of uses. Sure I could call and ask him, but that kind of defeats the purpose of a surprise gift. By giving him cash, I know he'll get what he wants. We call them universal gift certificates.

We give cash because we don't want to have the awkward fake "Thank you, I wanted a HoundHunting-a-day calendar!" when he knows it will mean standing in line for 2 hours to exchange 2 of the 3 he got for something he can actually use. By exchanging cash he is usually online showing me "what I got him" (or at least helped him get) after the family meal. That makes me much happier seeing him excited about getting something he *really* wanted.

Now that there are little kids around at Christmas time, pretty much all of the gift giving has changed to focus on them. We adults usually give token or even gag gifts now and get much more enjoyment out of watching the kids and enjoying time together as a family than anything else.

Re:Isn't this illegal under consumer protection la

[Dthief]

Not if you opt into it via Amazon's terms of service.

You just will no longer be creating the same contract. The contract will now read this item will be offered to the recipient, which he/she can accept or exchange for credit towards another purchase.

Re:How about...

[c 0xFF]

Ahh! But this is done by a computer. That changes everything!

Re:How about...

[The Dancing Panda]

Yes, that "without the initial delivery" is what makes there no prior art, and a very cool idea.

How much dumberer do we have to get about gifts?

[hellfire]

I've always prided myself on meaningful and thoughtful gift giving. I was never perfect, but I tried very hard to think about every gift and how it matched that person. At the same time, I've always been someone who's been hard to shop for, because of my particular tastes, and because I disdain gift cards. I can understand people's desires to make gift giving easier, but let's get serious. A gift should be a well thought out and researched thing. Have we created such an incredibly greedy consumer society that a company like Amazon has to create services like "gift interception" to make up for the fact that we buy too much shit?

I mean c'mon. Consumers have this false guilt about giving money because "it's impersonal" so they feel it necessary to give a gift, or give a gift card. Forcing me to deal with your crappy gift, or forcing me to buy something from a store I don't want, is just annoying. So now, in order to deal with the fact that we have this incorrect sense that we must buy shit for each other or force each other to buy shit from a specific store, that we have to create brand spanking new processes just to deal with the fact that we as a people suck at something we shouldn't even be doing in the first place? This is why happy go lucky cheery people who think gifts are doubleplusgood and there couldn't possibly be a downside get pissed off when I point out the very real reasons why sometimes giving a gift is not as nice as you think.

It's a recession, and people are hurting for money. Instead of buying little timmy the latest power ranger or little sally the latest pillow pet, give them each $20 and open a saving account and teach them how to save. Or knit them a sweater. Or something equally unique or helpful. Last year for Christmas, my mother promised to make me about a dozen home cooked meals over the next year that I could take home with me. Best gift EVAR. Let's stop giving Amazon reasons to come up with ways to buy more shit.

Yeah...

[Greyfox]

Now if they can patent some defense against Aunt Milly visiting in the spring and being hurt that her crappy-ass gift isn't on prominent display in the middle of the living room. Perhaps they could intercept her airline ticket and send her to El Salvidor, instead...