Slashdot Mirror


Amazon Patents the Milkman

theodp writes "Got Milk? Got Milk Delivery Patent? Perhaps unfamiliar with the concept of the Milkman, the USPTO has granted Amazon.com a patent for the Recurring Delivery of Products , an idea five Amazon inventors came up with to let customers schedule product deliveries to their doorsteps or mailboxes on a recurring basis, without needing to submit a new order every time. 'For instance,' the filing explains, 'a customer may request delivery of one bunch of bananas every week and two gallons of milk every two weeks.'"

74 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by benjfowler · · Score: 3, Informative

    Jeff Bozos is a chiselling little crook.

    1. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by coastwalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You get the feeling that now the housing market is bust we need a new a new commodity to inflate into the next mega bubble.

      Ladies and gentlemen I give you the new economy - trading patent portfolios.

      1. Write down everything that has ever been done in human history on bits of paper
      2. Convert bits of paper into patents
      3. ?????
      4. Profit!

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    2. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One click was based on an idea a few thousand years old. "put it on my tab" worked like one-click for more than a thousand years.

    3. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by Smallpond · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even without considering prior art, this is not an invention.
      It's not patentable matter.
      Why is USPTO asleep at the switch?

      This would fall under "Business method" patents. As for recurring deliveries without reordering, maybe my weekly newspaper should print a story on this "new" business method. They've only been doing this since they started.

    4. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by hedwards · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I used to have vitamins shipped to me every couple months on a subscription basis. I'd be very curious as to what about this patent is novel in any way.

    5. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Patenting a process that's been around for hundreds of years (milk delivery or one-click "put it on my tab") isn't "new" or "useful".

    6. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by niftymitch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      35 USC 101: Patentable Subject Matter "Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title."

      That's the black letter law and has been for quite some time. Not saying it is right, or that the interpretations haven't been vastly overextended, but patents don't cover just inventions.

      Oh bother... someone has been futzing with the word process.

      There is an apparent corruption of the word process that confused a physical process with a logical process. The process for making steel is not the same as a process describing how to manage the making of steel.

      --
      Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
    7. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by niftymitch · · Score: 2

      Even without considering prior art, this is not an invention. It's not patentable matter. Why is USPTO asleep at the switch?

      Interesting -- there are USPTO processes that schedule payments and renewal of patents. Both push and pull....

      --
      Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
    8. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by Altus · · Score: 4, Funny

      You don't get it man... they are doing it on the internet

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    9. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by Luckyo · · Score: 3, Funny

      If they have indeed invented a way to ship items on the internet, rather then on delivery vans, I think they deserve the patent! :D

    10. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by sycodon · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's clear we don't having any budding Einsteins at the USPTO office.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    11. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by harlequinn · · Score: 2

      But it has to be "new and useful" - so by definition if it is not new then it is not patentable matter.

      As to what a process constitutes, I'd suggest that each process should have to be evaluated on its own to determine whether it is in fact worthy of being considered a process. E.g. forming a queue, while a process, should not on its own be considered a process worthy of patenting. There would have to be something else that makes it novel.

    12. Re:Way to go, patenting the fucking obvious by zzyzyx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why is USPTO asleep at the switch?

      A rejected patents entails a relatively small application fee, needs a motivated rejection memoir from the examiner, which can be appealed and ensures a long processing time of the patent application.

      On the other hand, an accepted patent means recurring renewal fees for the USPTO, and a painless job for the examiner which is paid in part depending on how many applications he can process per month.

      Does that answer your question?

  2. Frost Pist! by PPH · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What about ice delivery?

    You kids with refrigerators stay off my lawn!

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  3. It's official by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 3, Funny

    The USPTO has no signs of life...

    --
    Karma: Bad
    1. Re:It's official by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apparently, you can take any patent in the database, copy-pasta in a word processing document, go to the end of the document and add these characters:

      ....ON A COMPUTER!

      And you have a new patent, ready for filing.

      This is becoming absolutely absurd.

    2. Re:It's official by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Funny

      No.. but add "...on a computer" on the end of it and it's your innovation.

    3. Re:It's official by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The thing is, that this wouldn't be patentable in real life, even when patents first began.

      Back then:
      "Hey, I want to patent something?"

      USPTO: "What?"

      "A customer requests a product, not just once, but to have it delivered to them regularly. We keep their names on file and send it out and collect payment at the end of the month."

      USPTO: "That's not an invention, that's how you run your business. Fuck off."

    4. Re:It's official by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apparently, you can take any patent in the database, copy-pasta in a word processing document, go to the end of the document and add these characters:

      ....ON A COMPUTER!

      And you have a new patent, ready for filing.

      In a 2007 ruling the Supreme Court said these sorts of "combination patents" are not valid. So I can't see how the USPTO can justify continuing to issue them.

    5. Re:It's official by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Does that mean anyone who writes spaghetti code will now owe royalties to him? Entry level programmers, and the companies that hire them, will be bankrupt within a day.

    6. Re:It's official by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More closely to the actual patent:

      "My invention is a method for business, where I have a machine that will listen to my customers, record what products they want regularly, and maintain an ongoing list for each customer. Whenever a product on the list needs to be ordered so it will arrive when the customer wants it, this machine will alert me place the order on the customer's behalf... on a computer."

      Or in other words, it's not really like a milkman, or even how a milkman operated, but let's not let that get in the way of our Slashdot-mandated rant against the USPTO.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    7. Re:It's official by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Funny

      it's not really like a milkman, or even how a milkman operated

      I was a milkman once, let me tell you it was a tough job. I had no idea what my customers wanted, when they wanted it, or hell, I didn't even know where they lived, I just wandered around town until I ran out of gas then dumped the whole load of milk in the ditch and walked home.

      Just think, if only someone had invented a way to keep a list of people, what they wanted, when they wanted it and where they wanted me to drop it off, I might have been able to keep my job a second day!

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:It's official by DrData99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, Amway Corp has been doing this *on a computer* for quite some time. And they have lawyers that *might* take exception to having their business processes patented by someone else...

    9. Re:It's official by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Now, see, if you had only had Amazon's system, you would have had each house's order readily packed in your truck, whether they were regular customers or not. All you'd have had to do would be drive past their house and throw the order in the general direction of the door, porch, or doghouse with your apparently-normal level of concern. No worries about special orders for the day or who's paying when... just driving and tossing.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  4. Sounds like a subscription... by hedgemage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Newspapers, magazines, book-of-the-month, all these are products that are delivered at regularly scheduled intervals. But these are old media, so it makes sense that Amazon doesn't know about them.

    1. Re:Sounds like a subscription... by digitig · · Score: 5, Informative

      When I had milk deliveries from a milkman -- quite a few years ago now -- I managed the deliveries over the internet. I no longer get that delivery, but I do get a recurring vegetable box delivery and a recurring snack box delivery, both of which I manage over the internet. This is in the UK, though, and the US Patent Office might not be aware that we exist.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
  5. Why patent? by schneidafunk · · Score: 2

    The first time they try to defend this patent, it will be thrown out of court. Seems like a waste of time & money.

    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Why patent? by Desler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because they can use it to threaten smaller competitors.

    2. Re:Why patent? by characterZer0 · · Score: 2

      Or they figure it is cheaper and easier for them to patent it than to deal with some other company patenting it and harassing them.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    3. Re:Why patent? by Githaron · · Score: 2

      All lot of small companies that do not have the resources to get into a long legal battle will pay out. Even if they fought and managed to win, the legal battle would likely either bankrupt them or put them so far behind their competition that they might has well be bankrupt. The patent office has been irresponsible by letting bad patents through and expecting the judicial system to validate/invalidate them in court.

    4. Re:Why patent? by leonardluen · · Score: 2

      haha, you think it is defensive!

      how soon we forget "1-click"

  6. Joke of the year. by NettiWelho · · Score: 2

    United States Patent and Trademark Office.

  7. Really??? by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "... an idea five Amazon inventors came up with ..."

    It took five of them to come up with this brilliance??? Amazon must have some stellar intellects...

    --
    Karma: Bad
    1. Re:Really??? by NettiWelho · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Amazon must have some stellar intellects...

      Or an R&D department filled with lawyers instead of engineers.

    2. Re:Really??? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Funny

      "... an idea five Amazon inventors came up with ..."

      It took five of them to come up with this brilliance??? Amazon must have some stellar intellects...

      On the other hand, it does open up a new avenue for the old joke setup;

      How many Amazon inventors does it take...

      - to screw in a lightbulb?
      5 - one to screw it in, one to file a patent on the process of rotating an object until it is seated in a socket, and 3 more to pat each other on the back.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:Really??? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      Amazon would never be so ineffective. They certainly would file several patents on this: One for rotating an object in order to get it seated, and another one for stopping the rotation at the point where it is seated, both with subclauses for the case that the object is a light bulb, that the place it is put into is a light bulb socket, and that the direction of rotation is clockwise (and to be on the safe side, also a subclause for the case where you put it in by counter-clockwise rotation). Then two further patents for removing the old light bulb. In addition, one on selecting the correct light bulb for the socket. Not to forget the patent for the method of detecting when a light bulb has to be replaced by checking if light is emitted by it when a voltage is applied.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Really??? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why did the 5 Amazon inventors cross the road?

      To slap the chicken with a lawsuit for not purchasing a license to their method of relocating livestock from one side of a tarmac surface to the other via bipedal forward kinetics patent

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:Really??? by crunchygranola · · Score: 2

      Dilbert is luck he only got his boss's name on it. I have a patent filed by an Internet company that has about a dozen names on it. One other engineer, besides myself, created all of the work described in the patent. But every manager in the two chains-of-command (tech and business) involved is on the patent, some of them people I had never heard of, plus as few who were completely unknown to me. The order of listing naturally has us two engineers at or close to the end of the list.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    6. Re:Really??? by sxltrex · · Score: 2

      You forgot: "...on a computer."

  8. Re:Ok by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 2

    Bravo to them to think of patenting such nonsense. Who woulda thunk??? The USPTO must be a bunch of monkeys behind the keyboard...

    --
    Karma: Bad
  9. Ok... by Agares · · Score: 2

    This is crazy why do companies even get patents like this anyways? I use to think that people who say we should do away with patents were a little crazy, but maybe it wouldn't be as bad as I thought if it were to happen? I don't know hard to say, but stuff like this is ridiculous. Something seriously needs to be done already.

  10. This is actually pretty useful... by AcquaCow · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...I use it so that I get a new pack of socks every 6 months...

    Nothing better than coming home from work to a fresh package of socks!

    ERMAGHERD SCHOCKS!

    --

    up 12 days, 22:30, 2 users, load averages: 993.20, 994.21, 994.56
    *makes note to limit user processes...
  11. How many amazon inventors does it take... by Dancindan84 · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many amazon inventors does it take to screw in a light bulb? No one knows, but it takes 5 to figure out how to automatically send you a new one every 6 months.

    --
    "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
  12. Well ok then. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Did someone at Amazon tell their boss that you can patent the most bullshit things, and they're just seeing what the biggest BS patent they can get is?

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  13. Hmmm ... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Columbia House did this years ago. I know many people get their oil or propane delivered regularly. TFS points out the milkman. Newspapers have been delivered for a long time.

    This is a business process, not an invention from what I can tell.

    Yet another patent which is a "system and methodology for doing something we've been doing for decades, but with a computer".

    Epic fail to the USPTO.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Hmmm ... by characterZer0 · · Score: 2

      I signed up on the internet to have diapers delivered on a schedule in 2007, 2 years before the filing date.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    2. Re:Hmmm ... by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but is this a "new method of doing business" -- or an old way of doing business, but with a computer?

      I'm not getting a whole lot of "new method" out of that.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  14. Re:Ok by HaZardman27 · · Score: 2

    That's giving them too much credit. If that were the case, with enough of them something of value would transpire.

    --
    Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
  15. What if? by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are Amazon deliberately trying to discredit the USPTO, or even the entire patent system?

    This patent fails on so many criteria: prior art, lack of novelty, obvious. If it's granted, it's a crock.

    ...laura

  16. Re:Ok by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

    How nobody else implemented this almost justifies that amazon should get the patent...

    Newspapers implemented it a few centuries ago. If you subscribe to a newspaper, it is delivered to your door, and you get a discount off the newsstand price. You can also vary the schedule. For instance you can get it delivered everyday, or just on Sunday.

  17. Jeff Bezos IS A GENIUS... by Assmasher · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...his ACTUAL goal is to have software patents abolished entirely - while simultaneously protecting his company from others who patent things out of greed and avarice.

    This explains why he continually patents the most ridiculously obvious things - it's an effort to eventually (so he hopes) get the non-technical world to realize how absolutely f***ing stupid the software patent system is. Sadly, he appears to think that his efforts need to be even more obvious; ergo, the latest patent.

    I'm telling you - GENIUS...

    BTW - On a serious note, I'd be embarrassed as an engineer to have my name as 'inventor' on a patent so blatantly f***ing stupid.

    --
    Loading...
  18. Defensive publication by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's what "defensive publication" is for. Any invention that one publishes can't later be patented by someone else.

    1. Re:Defensive publication by leonardluen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      except you can't use those to threaten and counter sue and attempt to force them to drop their suit.

      for an analogy...say you are a bully carrying a stick out to steal someones lunch money. you come across victim A who is holding up his backpack defensively...might as well take a few whacks at him, he can't do much to you, and maybe you will get lucky and his lunch money will fall out of his pockets...worse case you hit him too hard and your stick breaks

      on the other hand you come up to victim B who also has a stick. now you have to consider whether you are the one that will get the beating. it is similar to the debate about guns, having your own stick puts you on equal footing to your aggressor.

  19. Re:Ok by samkass · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not arguing that it's a defensible patent, but it's also not patenting what the summary or TFA claims. Here's the #1 core claim of the patent:

    1. A computer-implemented method for providing recurring delivery of products, the method comprising performing instructions under the control of a computer system for: receiving at the computer system a designation of a delivery slot and a recurring delivery list comprising one or more list items, each of the one or more list items identifying a product, a quantity to deliver, and a frequency of delivery; periodically generating, by the computer system, an order having a date and time for delivery based on a next occurrence of the delivery slot, the order being generated in advance of the date and time for delivery such that the order has a period of time of pendency prior to the delivery; creating, by the computer system, one or more order items for the order based on a last delivery date and the frequency of delivery of each list item in the recurring delivery list; receiving at the computer system a change made to a first list item of the recurring delivery list during the period of time of pendency of the order; in response to receiving the change, determining, by the computer system, whether the order includes an order item corresponding to the first list item; in response to determining that the order includes an order item corresponding to the first list item, modifying, by the computer system, the order item corresponding to the first list item based on the change made to the first list item of the recurring delivery list; and providing, by the computer system, the order to an order fulfillment system capable of causing the one or more order items to be delivered substantially on the date and time for delivery.

    In other words, it's a particular implementation of a subscription system that has to include every element in the above list in order to infringe. It would be easy to work around this in implementing a subscription system. It's also not generally how milkmen used to operate. It's also PROBABLY covered by prior art, but whenever I hear "X just patented Y that's stupid LOLOL!" I have to go to the claims, and I usually see that, no, only a particular implementation/method for accomplishing Y is covered.

    --
    E pluribus unum
  20. Re:We're doomed. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The inventor of that, William Murdoch, actually didn't patent it because James Watt Jr informed him that it wasn't patentable.

    James Watt's father, the more famous James Watt of steam engine fame, then went on to steal the idea for himself.

    *The* Watt is remembered as the father of the steam engine. His true contribution to history wasn't really technological: He invented patent trolling. Boulton and Watt's firm dominated the industrial revolution by systematically patenting every little detail they could come up with, right down to individual layouts of gears, and then letting the lawyers loose on anyone who dared compete. Far from advancing steam technology, he deliberately held it back, fearful that smaller and more practical engine technology would be disruptive to his highly profitable business manufacturing large stationary engines. Murdoch eventually became a partner in the firm once it passed from Sr to Jr, having established his loyalty both by his skill at invention and his willingness to perform industrial espionage - offering assistance to unsuspecting inventors and smaller steam firms, only so he could gain access to their workshops and later testify in court that he had seen them using mechanisms patented by Watt.

  21. This time it's real ... by udippel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We were used to plentiful of uninformed /. 'news' over the last decade on patents and stuff; when 'filing' and 'granted' was considered the same, effectively, and lots of nonsense, like the contents of the abstract being considered as the underlying idea, or even as the legally binded grant, and much more.

    In a nutshell, I expected the same, yet again, and was almost reluctant to even go into the details and actually read the document.
    OMG!
    It is a patent
    It does grant what the summary said
    Incredible.!!

    There is a comment from AC further up ("Bad summary of patent") stating correctly that it does contain a last minute change as necessity for potential infringement. True. But I can't believe that there is no anticipating document before 2009, where a recurring delivery system of any sorts had a 'last check' of possible modifications by the customer before the actual delivery.

    Much too often, I had to come to the defense of my former colleagues in patent examination. In this case, however, I need to agree when someone questioned if there are signs of life left in the office.
    Actually, I doubt it.

  22. Re:Underground service by digitig · · Score: 2

    Do they deliver to basements?

    Yes, they do! (As long as the basement has an outside door.) In fact, most large UK supermarkets do home delivery for a modest charge, and I know people who do all of their grocery shopping on-line. They do leave the house, but not for grocery shopping.

    --
    Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
  23. Re:Ok by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

    How long did this patent take to process? I had a local food delivery service doing exactly what this patent describes 12 years ago... and they weren't the first one in my area to do it (first one was around 16 years ago I think).

    Add to that that Amazon doesn't even sell produce in my area, and what I get is...
    higher prices to cover patent licensing with no discernible gain to anyone (these other companies that came up with the same solution as Amazon are NOT competing with them in the local market -- and it can be proven that they arrived at the solution independently just by using the wayback machine).

  24. Re:Ok by Jmc23 · · Score: 2

    Sounds like a few of the organic delivery services I've used in Canada.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  25. Re:Ok by holostarr · · Score: 2

    How about any of these services:

    Dollar Rubber Club
    Craft Coffee
    Birch Box
    Hall & Madden

    Or visit the link below for a list of on line subscriptions:

    Subscription Services

  26. Write to your congressperson by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Informative

    Everyone, repeat after me: "Business methods should not be patentable"
    That means:
    - No one-click ordering patents
    - No more patents on online auctions
    The courts cannot fix this. It is up to congress.

  27. Re:Ok by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

    As I understand, they patented their subscribe and save feature which has been around for years. How nobody else implemented this almost justifies that amazon should get the patent... almost, it's a stupid patent.

    When you look at the actual patent you see there was plenty of prior art cited. If Amazon cited these you can bet they believe (as does the USPTO) that the Amazon patent is significantly different, and does not infringe.

    You have to READ the patent to see what part of this is new.

    For instance Amazon states in the Patent

    Some online merchant systems may provide customers the ability to place standing orders for delivery of consumable products on a recurring basis, such as every week or every month. However, these systems may be limited in their flexibility for allowing modifications of the recurring orders or for allowing the addition of one-time or specialty products to an order. Further, the customer may not be able to schedule the recurring orders for the same time and day of each week or month, thereby making it difficult for the customer to arrange to be present at the delivery of perishable goods or other consumables.

    This patent is different, in that it allows Scheduling not only the day of a re-occurring delivery, but also the time. This is pretty significant. You get to choose the time slot from available time slots, when the truck will be in your neighborhood on the days you request, at the hour you request. And you do this by some form of drag and drop of products to your door step, selecting from the available time slots (presumably when the truck will be there). Pretty specific if you ask me.

    Further, you can easily change it by adding or subtracting items (one time, or every scheduled time) to be on that truck, put it on vacation hold, etc.

    (If Amazon can actually pull that off in any grand scale, I'd be surprised, but that's not the patent office's problem.)

    Further virtually every claim in the patent is proceeded by the words: A computer-implemented method.
    Dammit! I hope there is an App for this!!

    This, the computer scheduling done by the customer, combined with picking the actual delivery time slot from the available time slots, is the bit that they are patenting. Not the milkman, not the newspaper boy, not your local grocery weekly delivery.

    The closest prior art is the cited Amway patent. But it merely suggests to the customer that they might want to order some more Amway for future delivery, and says nothing about the details of precision or picking of exact days and time slots.

    I'll leave it to the lawyers (and wanna-be lawyers) among you to pick out the details where this patent differs from the others, but do try to contain your rage till you at least Read the Patent, and ignore the hype in the summary. Its really pretty clever, and relies on Amazon knowing the precise location of the delivery vehicles on their routes in the future, and using that information, allowing the customers to make sure a half dozen bananas are on that truck, and will arrive at their door step when they are home to receive them.

    Ambitious, and fairly novel if you ask me.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  28. Re:Ok by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly.

    Its pretty amazing when you read all the claims, and imagine dragging and dropping a dozen eggs onto the manifest of a truck that will just happen to be near your house at 7pm every second Wednesday. And then being able to put that delivery on vacation hold, or add a one time order of 12 pork chops for the big barbecue you are planning next Saturday. And the delivery will take place within the time period you specify so the neighbors dog doesn't run off with your chops while you are at work.

    Amazon has to know where the trucks will be at future points in time.
    Provide you with a way to put products on that truck, set them to be periodic or one time, Adjust your orders, add, subtract, reduce, or hold.
    All from your computer, and (hopefully) from your smartphone.

    Its way more ambitious than the Milkman, and I'm not aware of anything that comes close.

    People have to stop the knee-jerk reaction to headlines.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  29. Emulation ALONE should not qualify it by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Just like the "slider lock" smart-phone case; any emulation of an existing non-patented physical process should not by default get a patent. A specific implementation of an emulation, okay that may be patentable, but not the mere act of emulation.

    Thus one cannot patent emulating baseball itself because the act of baseball is not patentable (the game has been around a while). However, a specific algorithm for emulating the game is perhaps legitimately deserving of a patent, or at least a copyright. But that should not cover ALL baseball emulation attempts by competitors; only those that use the same algorithm. (Likely there are many ways to emulate baseball, to varying degrees.)

  30. Same point, two days ago... by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 2

    I said it before and I'll say it again. Taking something that exists and making it digital (or on the internet or on your phone or any "just-add-technology" change) doesn't make it new. Prior art should still apply...I refer you to my comment on Tuesday

    Obvious, Novel, and Prior Art aren't just digital

  31. Re:Ok by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

    What do you mean? This is a staple means of operating for coffee, tea, wine, etc. type businesses from even before the DotCom bubble. "Send to my business 2lbs of Sumatra blend every two weeks. Bill my credit card."

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  32. Re:Ok by greg1104 · · Score: 2

    You idiot kids think you invented having a brain...this was exactly how just-in time ordering was already done on a computer by the auto industry in the 80's. Electronic data interchange (EDI) with exactly this sort of capability wasn't a new concept even then. "Please deliver me X widget assemblies and Y doodads every 9 days until I use EDI to tell you otherwise". Yup, remember first doing that myself in 1991.

  33. Re:Ok by greg1104 · · Score: 2

    There's this thing called delivery logistics, and Amazon is at best hundreds of years late to be inventing it now.

  34. Re:It is not first to invent, it is first to file. by RevSpaminator · · Score: 2

    First to File.. Hmm, that leaves a lot of room for corporate idea theft. Patent it before someone else does, even if they are still working on the invention in secret. Sweet.

  35. Fire the reviewers by jklovanc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is one instance where the incompetence of the reviewers is so blatant that they should no longer be working for the USPTO. There is a point that people need to be held accountable for their decisions. The USPTO has become too much of a rubber stamp under the idea that the courts will sort out any issues. The system breaks down under that model as many people do not have the money to go to court. The USPTO is hardly a speed bump in the patent process any more.

  36. Re:Ok by c++0xFF · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First off, yes, I read the patent.

    Amazon is, of course, doing something on the scale that nobody else has attempted. They'll probably be very good at it, and good for them.

    However, that has nothing to do with the patent. The processes described by the patent are the exact same thing that people have been doing in real life on smaller scales for hundreds (or maybe even thousands), of years.

    There is nothing ... NOTHING ... in that patent that enables them to do this on a large scale, except for the automation that a computer provides (which, unfortunately, seems to make anything patentable these days). If you disagree, please call out something specific, like an actual claim in the patent, and a description of why it's something new and not just the first and most obvious solution their engineers came up with.

    Congratulations to Amazon if they pull off this scale of delivery. But what they're doing should in no way be patentable, at least not as described in the patent that was awarded.

  37. Re:Ok by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Informative

    They are patenting an entire delivery scheduling methodology for customer order management of groceries (etc) that will re-occur on a predictable and fairly precise time period of the customer's choosing.

    Still, it's hardly rocket science, is it? It's more flexible & sophisticated than telling the milkman to bring you a pint every other day, but it's not a qualitatively different thing like a jet compared to a piston engine.

    I'd be surprised of most ERP systems don't have something like this.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  38. When elephants fight by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    As an ex-paper boy I assure you newspaper deliveries were MORE flexible than Amazon 50yrs ago.

    They are patenting an entire delivery scheduling methodology for customer order management of groceries (etc) that will re-occur on a predictable and fairly precise time period of the customer's choosing.

    I have a picture of a milkman's horse lifting his blinkers with one hoof and rolling his eyes at this patent, it's just ordinary business practice for any company that delivers stuff to your door. The local chemist paid me to deliver stuff on on a push bike way back in the 60's. Most family's had one car (at most), the chemist had plenty of regular customers who had difficulty getting around so he bent over backwards to accommodate their needs. He didn't have a computer and trucks, he had an order book, a big black phone, and a bunch of eager kids on push bikes who had more than enough local knowledge to make UPS blush. If a customer was in dire need during school hours, he would get in his VW and deliver it himself. Virtually the same service is available today but it's organized by the government, you get a qualified nurse in a tiny car rather than a grotty kid on a push bike. There is however a shit load more paper work involved to join up.

    Copyright protects Amazon's software implementation of this age old business practice, the only possible use for a patent such as this is to burden and stall serious competitors with serious litigation, as in Apple vs Samsung. Software patents are a legislative experiment that failed. It was worth having the experiment, but now we know that all it does is provide an arena for elephants to fight, and we all know what happens to the grass when elephants fight.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  39. Re:Ok by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    Why all the hate for the first group that could actually put all the pieces together and make it work?

    No one here hates them for "doing it," but some hate them for "patenting it." I don't even hate them for that. I don't hate Amazon at all. Amazon is just doing what any big company in a similar situation would do: try to patent everything and see what goes through. My "hate" is reserved for the USPTO. They supposed to be acting in the interest of the citizens. By allowing garbage patents like this, they are stifling competition and making our economy less efficient.