Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Granted Location Tracking Patent
bizwriter writes "A new patent for Amazon just put the company squarely in the location tracking controversy. It covers a system to not only track, through mobile devices, where individuals or aggregated users have been, but to determine where they're likely to go next to better target ads, coupons, or other messages that could appear on a mobile phone or on displays that individuals are likely to see in their travels. The system could also use someone's identity to further tailor the marketing according to demographic information."
Just don't buy from amazon and you won't be tracked!
Lo and behold, for I am a sig!
As this has been done before - see "scavenger hunts": http://www.cellphonesinlearning.com/2010/01/scvngr-cell-phone-scavenger-hunt.html
Then they got nothin'
The way the budget is shaping up this Christmas, that's all they gonna get.
Of course, statistics gathered from Geocaching might prove prior art, no?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
They have to make money off me visiting their site somehow. I only use them for gaging prices before buying something from somebody else.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
What makes you think Amazon will not be suing others for ridiculous and non-innovative technology such as buying items with 1 click? Oh wait, they already did AFAIK :)
Still, I feel Apple is more of a patent troll and more of a control freak, so I kinda still agree that they are worse, but that doesn't mean its good, and comparing to Apple would be pointless.
...blocking your carefully targeted ads.
The last update of the Amazon Android app had a new security requirement that it be able to read your GPS and gather fine location data. That was the end of that app on my device. I don't mind that they track what I look at on their web site or thru their app, but to track where I am to be able to sell that information to others just pisses me off.
On the other hand, perhaps I should load the app, but only turn it on when I'm in Barnes and Noble looking at Nooks.
I kinda hope they do in this case, and turn the whole user-tracking area into a patent minefield that companies are afraid to touch.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
... but for when you're going to buy your next coffee. Or maybe it's more like Machine Of Death...
If Amazon have a patent on it then no one else will be able to do it (ahem) and so our privacy will be better preserved
I wish ...
If you don't want your location being tracked, turn off location tracking in your browser or in your OS's location options. Simples.
which is totally what she said
I'm an undergrad student getting a degree in Business, and I'm probably pointing out the obvious when I say that this will not stop because there is far too much money to be made out of it. The thing is about the micromarkets (i.e. selling directly to a consumer) is that it takes out all the guesswork involved in trying to appeal to a mass or niche market. No (expensive) market research needs to be done - other than having an algorithm sort through a bunch of information about yourself (provided most likely by Google or Facebook, whatever's your poison) and matching it with related products, and BAM. You're being advertised to right there, at (or near) the store, advertising to you about something that is probably relevant to you. The power of this is not to be underestimated, old media methods were like carpetbombing, just get the message out to everyone, and hope it hits; new media is now a surgical strike at your wallet via the phone in your pocket. Unless there is political control, public outrage or (heaven forbid) good corporate ethics, this is here to stay.
I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
It's early Sunday morning, very few cars in sight, you're driving along with your girlfriend and realize you forgot your cellphone at home. "Don't worry she says, I brought mine, we don't have to go back. So we keep driving and as we pass each electronic billboard on the highway I see various ads. Now I'm really nervous. She's looks coyly away.
Sex hormone therapy on sale now! Be a man in a man's world!
10-pack of stap-ons on sale now! Turn right at the next exit.
Win a trip to the transvestite convention in Las Vegas simply by dialing 1-888-HOT-MAMA!
I think it is truly a novel idea - you went to two department stores, and now it's around 11:30 AM. You're probably going to eat lunch out. Time to advertise food places. Location over time is not the same as location-based. And as long as business process patents are allowed, this seems to qualify.
if they start a patent war over tracking us, then maybe there will be fewer people doing it.
Track me and I'll be in the crowd outside Amazon HQ with the pitchforks and torches.
At least Bezos will see it coming.
Have gnu, will travel.
I'm developing a deep hatred of ads. I'm turning into an old intolerant grandpa.
They already know where you're going since you asked for directions to it! Therefore they can show ads for where you're going to be without infringing Amazon's patent.
who would want to be tracked for the purpose of giving you ads? i dont want ads popping up on my phone. i want my phone to be a PHONE.
Patents are supposed to teach us something we didn't know but this patent is just shuffling data around. Once phones are location aware, it isn't an invention to look up what businesses are at that location and then what related businesses are in the direction of travel. This is an obvious application of the location aware phone invention.
Unless - as in this case - you are a brick and mortar store targeted for Amazonian destruction. In this (refreshing?) case, the user scanning in price comparisons is merely a vector, akin to rats carrying bubonic plague.
Merry Christmas!
I'm going to point out the pink elephant in the corner - software patents. I'm ignoring the distinction between various patents used to protect software, as this argument holds to all patents that are applied to software. Patents were meant to protect an invention. What is invented? A machine (machine, in the broadest sense) that produces a new composition of matter and/or the new composition itself. Both of which have value of greater or longitudinal quality when compared with similar compositions and are subject to patent protection on the grounds they are non-obvious and inventive. I think software patents like the above are not inventive. In the virtual world data is the commodity and software operates on data. In the same way inventions often operate on physical mediums like matter or organizations of people. To invent something in the virtual world (in code) is not the same as in physical medium. On that note, Beauregard claims should have never been allowed. Patents like the above do not describe anything new or non-obvious; they translate, aggregate, or display data. At no point do they produce new valuable data, and thus do not qualify for patent protection. While they do produce something of value in the physical world. If we accept the argument that to invent in the physical or virtual world means fundamentally different things, then how can a patent of the virtual be justified by the physical. In addition, they are non-obvious because they do not produce new data, they dress up the data gathered. If someone were to change what a machine looked like, but not how the machine worked or what it accomplished, it wouldn't be patentable. Unfortunately, analogous software patents are granted frequently .The patent system can't figure out how to define software patents and in their wake poor patents and predatory practices have abounded.
Information wants to be free... except my information!
File sharing with the consent of copyright holder isn't really stealing, but a benefit to them... but getting my information after I agree to the terms of service is stealing and provides no benefit that I like!
What walking contradictions we've become. The fact is we want machines that learn our preferences, language, desires and attitudes, and are excited by things like Siri and recommendation engines. But when push comes to shove on anyone actually using the necessary metrics to accomplish any of that, we flip out about it.
"They didn't pay me for this," is the RIAA/MPAA claim. "I didn't consent," means the person didn't read their terms of service. And we say "sell my information" as if we had that information in the first place, when in fact, we voluntarily helped generate the information via collaboration with the 3rd party.
I'm not saying it should be field day, but it's /. hypocrisy to decry the RIAA/MPAA for defending what they clearly own, but declare jihad against anyone reversing the equation on us. And the most ironic part is that our positions are less about principals than they are about self-interest... the same things motivation the companies.
I8-D