Amazon Patent Looks To Make Receiving Lousy Gifts A Thing Of The Past
from the provided-all-gift-giving-runs-through-Amazon,-which-is-THE-PLAN dept
An interesting patent has surfaced over at Quartz, detailing a method for exchanging unwanted gifts. Amazon filed this patent application in 2006 and had it granted in 2010, but so far, has yet to make use of it. (This is not to be confused with Amazon's more controversial, broadly written "method of buying gifts online" patent which was granted back in 2009.) The twist in this patent is the exchange method, which would take place prior to receiving the unwanted gift.A number of "rules" can be set, heading off unwanted gifts before they even hit the order fulfillment queue. In the case of the hypothetical "Aunt Mildred," the user can choose to make the best of her good intentions that disguise themselves as bad gifts and eliminate her almost entirely from the gift selection process while also leaving her completely unaware that she's been cut out in favor of a checkboxed "middleman."
In addition, users can select whether to be notified and carry out the exchange manually or allow the algorithm to do all the heavy lifting. Interestingly, the patented system will also allow purchasers to place limits on exchanges, which should lead to some very interesting post-Christmas conversations, once all the behind-the-scenes gift trading has finished.
Of course, the whole setup process is wasted should gift givers decide to purchase from other services, but adding the ability to painlessly 'hot swap' yet another sweater for something you'd rather have, without having to go through the rarely painless return/exchange process could have many Amazon customers recommending the service to familial holdouts.
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Outlook
The text "Rule description (click on an underlined value to edit)" is identical. And isn't it strange that it uses an interface for a Windows application (such as the OK, Apply, Cancel buttons) when Amazon would most likely have a web interface for this service.
I still think it's a wind-up and when I've had my first coffee of the day I'll regret commenting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Outlook
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When I made my wedding gift list, I opted for that, so I basically got a debit card with all that money instead of the things people thought they were gifting me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can just imagine someone saying "Oh no.. not another pair of mittens. I already have 100."
I can't say I've ever actually used Amazon's wishlist functionality so my account is not connected with anyone else's and to my knowledge vice versa. They obviously think there is a space for this kind of thing though and it is somewhat intriguing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can someone explain...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can someone explain...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Umm. Crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[x] Convert [any gift] from [anynone] to [gift card].
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Insert brand choice ________
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That is a sad statement about the selfishness of people.
I still have that sweater Grandma knitted for me when I was 12. No I can't wear it, yes grandma is long gone, but I keep it still.
I have never and would never re-gift. It is an insult to the person who gave you a gift and it is an insult to the person you give the gift to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Respect is one of those funny things it is most often received when it is first given.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The point is it is offensive to re-gift... without telling the person that gave you the gift and giving them the opportunity to fix it.
It is totally selfish to take a gift knowing full well you are going to re-gift it. It is two-faced and dishonest, both to the person who gave you the gift and the person you gave the gift to.
You simply need to be honest with the person and say: "hey Aunt Nell I already have this, would you like to get me something else, or I can return it and choose something else."
There is a right way and a wrong way to go about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Have no regard for the person who gives you a gift? Give no thought, or in fact invest anything in a re-gift you give to someone else?
I strive to be better than others, not that I always succeed.
Just because the lack of respect is rampant and extends from kids today all the way through the highest political offices doesn't make it right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The attitude you espouse seems very similar to the companies who say "I'm selling you this, but after you've bought it, I'm still going to impose the following rules..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I am saying that it is not respectful to accept a gift and then throw it in the trash, re-gift it...
While you certainly have a right to do whatever you want with a gift given to you, don't expect your actions to have no influence on future gifts offered or in fact the relationship with the gift giver as a whole.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift
"A gift or a present is an object given without the expectation of payment. Although gift-giving might involve an expectation of reciprocity, a gift is meant to be free. In many human societies, the act of mutually exchanging money, goods, etc. may contribute to social cohesion. Economists have elaborated the economics of gift-giving into the notion of a gift economy. By extension the term gift can refer to anything that makes the other happier or less sad, especially as a favor, including forgiveness and kindness."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You should shoot him with a Deringer instead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Bit Late
See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/26/AR2010122601836.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]