Great Timing: USPTO Gives Amazon Patent For 'Reliable Ratings'

from the that-would-be-an-oops... dept

Tue, Apr 14th 2009 12:12pm — Mike Masnick

theodp writes "Do bad patents bring bad karma? Less than 24 hours after a hacker identified as 'Weev' claimed he exploited a feature for reporting inappropriate content to wreak havoc on Amazon's product ratings (Amazon blamed a "glitch"), the USPTO issued Amazon.com a patent for the Automatic Identification of Unreliable User Ratings, an 'invention' which - you guessed it - purportedly prevents Amazon's product ratings from being gamed by providing a feature for reporting inappropriate content ('Section 244 also contains a link 254 to a display (not shown) where customer CCC can report that item review 222 contains scandalous or inappropriate material')."

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: patents, ratings, reliability, uspto
Companies: amazon

14 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

TheStuipdOne, 14 Apr 2009 @ 12:22pm

wow
stupid and useless ... good job amazon and USPTO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Apr 2009 @ 12:36pm

Since the patent is for a method and apparatus, and not for the implementing code, this article seems to be pointless. Obviously, as pointed out by the "hacker", the code can be "gamed", but that is irrelevant to what the patent embraces.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger, 14 Apr 2009 @ 12:55pm
  
  Re:
  It's a joke, it's funny (as in Ha, Ha funny). It's not meant to point anything out about the patent system. It's just one of those poetic justice kind of things.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Apr 2009 @ 1:41pm
  
  Re:
  Since the patent is for a method and apparatus, and not for the implementing code, this article seems to be pointless. Obviously, as pointed out by the "hacker", the code can be "gamed", but that is irrelevant to what the patent embraces.
  
  It is entirely relevant if the code embodies the invention described by the patent.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
C.T., 14 Apr 2009 @ 12:46pm

Mike,

What exactly is the point of this post? Is there something specific in the patent filing that you question? Or, is this just an attempt to criticize the patent system through innuendo?

For as much as you accuse others of relying on straw man arguments, you sure seem to rely on them when it suits your cause.

I think it bears reiterating that I really like this site, and I find the vast majority of your posts to be very thoughtful. However, I really think you do a disservice to people who advocate IP reform (myself included) when you revert to populist attacks with little substance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo, 14 Apr 2009 @ 12:50pm
  
  Re:
  Yet another example of the height of ludicrousness which the patent office has attained!
  
  (Seriously gringo, I'm kinda slow and not a native English speaker, what's your problem?)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Apr 2009 @ 1:02pm
  
  Re:
  The point is in the caption, at least for those of us who know how to read.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Apr 2009 @ 1:38pm
  
  Re:
  Here you go, C.T., maybe this will help explain it to you:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 14 Apr 2009 @ 3:36pm
  
  Re:
  What exactly is the point of this post?
  
  It was funny... that's all... Based on the timing.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Apr 2009 @ 11:01pm
  
  Re:
  Is it not painfully obvious to you that a comment system that allows a user to report an inappropriate comment IS NOT A NEW, UNIQUE, NOVEL OR EVEN CREATIVE CONCEPT AT THIS POINT. That patent should not have been approved for an algorithm or 'invention' of any such kind.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brooks, 14 Apr 2009 @ 1:32pm

Ugh
1) "Weev" is a well known troll and liar, and taking credit here was a publicity stunt. This is well documented, and it's a shame to see Techdirt still falling for it after his claims were thoroughly debunked.

2) Amazon has acknowledged that the error was human in nature, due to crossed up definitions between different organizations, culminating in a big mistake. The "glitch" excuse, while cheesy, is no longer their line. Again, Techdirt should post the *current* state of news, or at least indicate that more complete info is available now.

3) The Amazon issue clearly had nothing to do with this patent, and theodp's characterization of it as a "bad patent" is totally unsupported either in his writeup or by Techdirt. Maybe it is a bad patent, I don't know. Given how error-filled this whole post is, though, I'm unlikely to assign much credibility to theodp or Techdirt on the subject.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 14 Apr 2009 @ 3:37pm
  
  Re: Ugh
  1) "Weev" is a well known troll and liar, and taking credit here was a publicity stunt. This is well documented, and it's a shame to see Techdirt still falling for it after his claims were thoroughly debunked.
  
  We weren't taking it seriously. This post was just supposed to be funny... Based on the timing, the whole thing was just amusing.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joel Coehoorn, 14 Apr 2009 @ 1:40pm

Conspiracy theory for the day
I wonder if this has anything to do with the bad ratings for video games with restrictive drm?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
teknosapien, 14 Apr 2009 @ 4:16pm

Maybe they should get one
for censorship also
[ link to this | view in chronology ]