Amazon Gets Patent on Consumer Reviews

S

Senad

New member
Here is a fun read :D.

http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3563396

Review your local dry cleaner, pay $10 million?

User reviews are a hot new content area, being used by Google (Quote, Chart), Yahoo (Quote, Chart) and MSN to sweeten their local search results. But as of Thursday, such consumer reviews could put search providers, as well as thousands of e-commerce sites, video rental or review sites and online booksellers, in the sights of Amazon.com's (Quote, Chart) lawyers.

The online retailer of books and just about everything else was awarded three new patents, covering its purchase circles, search and consumer reviews. While Amazon.com's patent police would go after Web publishers, not consumers, the review patent could put the kibosh on the social networking components of many search services.

Amazon.com's purchase circles can be based on everything from a hobby to an employer, or they can merely peep to see what's the hot book among Oracle employees. The patent covers methods of forming circles and marketing to them, for example, by showing one person looking at a book detail page and who else in the circle has bought that book.

The second patent covers a method of discovering and delivering as search results related products from multiple categories, such as books written by Steve Martin, as well as DVDs of movies in which he appeared.

The third patent is the real kicker. It covers methods for encouraging consumers to write reviews of items they've purchased by determining the optimal times to send them e-mails or reminders.

In one embodiment of the patent, the system sends consumers a message inviting them to write a review in a predetermined amount of time after the purchase. It's a method widely used by online retailers, including Yahoo (Quote, Chart) Shopping. The patent also covers the method of tracking who returns to rate products by asking them to click on a unique link in an e-mail.

But the patent even covers collecting reviews by letting visitors to a Web site fill out a form.

Yahoo has made a big push into user-generated media. In August, users of Yahoo 360 got the ability to rate local businesses and search for reviews written by others in their networks.

Amazon.com spokesman Craig Berman said he couldn't speculate on whether the company would attempt to license its new intellectual property.

As one of the first e-commerce companies, Amazon.com has been on both sides of patent infringement suits based on patents issued for practices that, in the time between patent application and award, have become standard operating procedure on the Web. These so-called submarine patents for business processes suddenly surface after other companies have based their operations on practices they cover.

For example, the Web seller has a hotly contested patent on one-click buying. It sued Barnes and Noble for infringing, but the rival bookseller won on appeal in 2001 and the companies settled in 2002. Another covers hosting electronic forums for discussing items for sale.

At the same time, Amazon.com is being sued by another e-commerce pioneer, Cendant Publishing. Cendant holds a patent on using a customer's purchasing history to recommend other items that might be of interest.
 
I would say it only makes sense.

Amazon.com practically ventured off the e-commerce industry, so they filed multiple patents - basically, whatever they were inventing first. Knowing that getting patents is a long long process, its about time some of them went through.

I don't think web sites that started Consumer Reviews long before Amazon was awarded with this latest patent, are in any legal danger, but those who will start after the fact could be faced with some legal papers. However, I am no expert on these issues.

Best,
 
The problem with this is, the practice is too common for Amazon to actually win a lawsuit for infringement.

Methods of users writing reviews have varied over time. The most common is presenting the consumer with a form.

Reminding a client, and inviting them to write a review is common place. In fact, it was one of the first things we learned in marketing 101.

Amazon would literally need to go after large companies on this one, including Microsoft, Sears, K-Mart, Wal-Mart, CNN, etc. First, they'd never win against giants like that. Second, they'd be lucky if they weren't faced with a class action suit by multiple big name companies who take part in ecommerce.

The other problem with this is, you have many companies such as Amazon, being legally backed by idiots who advise them that's it's a great idea to do things like this, and then advise them that it's still great, even after the practice has become common place. That leads to Craig Berman making uneducated and ludicrous statements such as "couldn't speculate on whether the company would attempt to license its new intellectual property"

That's like trying to patent a method of eating potato chips, and then suing anyone who eats them the same way.
 
This is ludicrous. The patenting office needs to start denying stupid patent requests like this one.
 
They should...but they probably won't.

It's the responsibility of the applicant to defend patents once the patents are filed - the patent office does nothing other than say, "Look, they filed the proper piece of paper with us." The govt. gets a smallish chunk of change for each patent application granted. Then lawyers go to work suing and / or defending based on these patents.

It gives the government money. It essentially creates revenue streams where none previously existed. It makes the economy go 'round. They won't stop the practice until something drastic happens - people would have to rise up en masse and say, "We're not giving any more relevance to patents coming out of the US government because they're too stupid", or something else that would signal a huge socioeconomic catastrophe.

Someone patented peanut butter and jelly sandwiches with the crusts cut off [ http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/04/children_rejoic.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_butter_and_jelly_sandwich ]. Smucker's then spent millions of dollars to buy the patent, build factories to produce their "Uncrustables", and send out C&D letters. The patent was overturned in a court of law. By then, though, Smucker's had pumped billions of dollars into the economy. Why would the PTB want to stop that?

Yes, it's egregiously stupid. Then again, this is a culture that has a television show called "Jackass".
 
It's not a problem with patents in general.

Patents are a good thing. They protect inventors, and product/service developers.

The problem we're discussing is the issuing of stupid patents such as this one, in particular.

Amazon cannot claim that they invented the website form, feedback reminders, etc for the use of obtaining feedback, because it's not something they invented, created or even developed. It's a method, and technology in use far before Amazon was even a twinkle in the eye of the internet community.

Patents are invalid once they are proven to be common practice. Kind of like patenting the use of the letter "A." You simply can't do it.

You would think the US Patent office would be a little more technically knowledgable, to know that the use of forms, and reminders have been a standard method of obtaining consumer reviews and feedback, that they wouldn't have granted the patent.

The article even states that Amazon has been in a little hotwater before, for this exact issue (having patents overturned, that became common practice between the time the papers were filed, and the time they were approved.)

Example:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/bpai/decisions/fd051033.pdf

These folks wanted to patent the use of computers to take orders, online and otherwise. If this had been granted, imagine what that would have meant to all online merchants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top