Slashdot Log In
Google Patents RSS Advertising
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:20 PM
from the thought-of-that dept.
from the thought-of-that dept.
IO ERROR writes "Google filed a patent application for targeted advertising in RSS feeds about a year and a half ago. The USPTO has now assigned it a number and placed it online. The patent application covers both targeting in RSS feeds and geotargeting by IP address. It gives some insight into how Google's ad servers work."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Prior art right here on Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
But were they targeted at a subset of readers? (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:But were they targeted at a subset of readers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Those evil bastards (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Those evil bastards (Score:3, Funny)
It might be scary to say this... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:4, Insightful)
Take off your tin-foil hat plz kthx.
So much for Google's "do no evil" eh? I wonder how the rest of the Slashbot population will pick up on this.
Parent
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Give 'em time
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:2)
Give 'em time
Yes, because Google is still a very young company: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://google.com [archive.org]
and is in clear and present danger of becomming evil incarnate: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://msn.com [archive.org]
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:2, Interesting)
Commercials (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm all for Google making things easier and doing cool stuff, but I'm not with them on this.
Of course, for those of us who have no desire to offer the same type of service for the next 20 years (or patents to cross-license, or deep pockets to pay licensing fees), it doesn't matter, I suppose.
Yet another example of why software should be firmly in the realm of copyright protection. That way, you can't copy what they wrote (unless given permission), but you're still free to offer a service based in the same *idea*.
Is Google finally turning evil?
Parent
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Get with the times, man.
Parent
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:2, Insightful)
Believe it or not, you can even find people who will only listen to music or read books by unpopular artists because they have an automatic bias toward the downtrodden, regardless of the artist's merits.
This is totally evil (Score:3)
After all, an economy encumbered by lawyers controlling our thoughts is what made capitalism and America great!!!
Re:It might be scary to say this... (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless Google have been exceptionally clever and done something I can't even dream of, they must be either inserting adverts in a way that most readers will ignore, or else they're inserting adverts in the same format as news items.
In which case, news and adverts will become "merged" with each other.
That sounds pretty dodgy to me. I don't mind adverts I can easily ignore that are sectioned off from content, but if I have to skip adverts in the middle of my RSS news feeds I'll get annoyed. Equally, if I set my news feed to display 25 items, and I end up getting 22 items and 3 adverts, I'll be even more annoyed.
Until now Google's advertising has been nice and discrete. This sounds a lot less discrete. It sounds like a step in the wrong direction.
Caveat: I reserve final judgement until I see how a Google ad-enabled feed looks in my reader.
Parent
Re:The method is only part of the picture (Score:2)
It seems like this patent is Google's entree into the slimy practice of patenting anything it can get its hands on. Google will be able to share its presence with other notable offenders, like Amazon, Microsoft, and several other firms. Because this is a principle in which I believe strongly, Google's method of advertising, though arguably one of the better ones in practice, will take a back seat to other, more salient issues - like their willingness to patent methods that have prior art, and that aren't re
The USPTO has done it again, brilliant. (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, it could be a defensive patent. Heaven knows who out there thinks he's patented the whole RSS idea.
Still, regarding this new patent, I'm looking forward to the usual Slashdot pick-apart, where every claim is shown to be something people have been doing for a decade, and enough prior art is unearthed in fifteen minutes to invalidate the patent ten times over.
Heck, why doesn't the USPTO lay off half its examiners and just post patent applications to Slashdot?
Re:The USPTO has done it again, brilliant. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, this is Google, we like them. We'll call this innovative.
Parent
Re:The USPTO has done it again, brilliant. (Score:2)
Shouldn't be too hard to do. There was a story on /. just today about how the USPTO keeps recruiting to try and deal with excessive workload, but can't keep the staff once it hires them.
If the workload is that high, it's hard to imagine them giving each application the attention it deserves.
So, not "clueless" precisely, but you
Amazon (Score:5, Funny)
Booyah
Evil Done, Dirt Cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
The PTO has become the "Monopoly Department" of the US Government. All day long they process applications for monopolies on businesses, responding "You go, girl!" to every one they possibly can. Now Google starts locking in all that "goodwill" they generated with inane faith-based nonsense like "do no evil". How long until they just patent "doing evil", on the premise that if they control it, they'll stop everyone else from doing it?
Re:Evil Done, Dirt Cheap (Score:3, Funny)
Microsoft will sue. They have both an interest and prior art.
Re:Evil Done, Dirt Cheap (Score:2, Informative)
Read the patent. The patent doesn't cover advertising in RSS. The patent covers a specific method for producing RSS ads.
The patent on MP3 compression did not cover compression of digital audio in general. It covered the techniques used in MP3 specifically.
The patent on RSA en
Patent a medium? (Score:2, Interesting)
slashvertisements (Score:2, Informative)
Not getting it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not getting it (Score:2)
Re:Not getting it (Score:3, Informative)
Incorporating targeted ads into information in a syndicated, e.g., RSS, presentation format in an automated manner is described. Syndicated material e.g., corresponding to a news feed, search results or web logs, are combined with the output of an automated ad server.
SO, RSS is just one of the mediums described. And it actually does appear to be a pretty specific method.
Non-obvious gone, patents soon to be meaningless (Score:4, Interesting)
The end result of this is that, eventually, all patents will become meaningless. There will be large-scale infringement because so many patents will cover things that are so obvious that everyone will need to or want to do them. How many years from now will we enter this new era of ignoring the broken system? Frivolous patents are hastening the end of all patents.
In Other News (Score:2, Funny)
Not Shocking. (Score:5, Insightful)
USPTO Mission (Score:5, Informative)
I have no mod points to give, but this point needs to be emphasized. This is the fundamental principle under which the USPTO has operated since its inception. You may not like it, but that's their charter. They are obligated by law to grant any patent that they believe in good faith has the potential to be enforcable and upheld by the courts. There is no "burden of proof" criteria involved; the USPTO must defer that decision to the courts.
Ever time something about USPTO comes up here, everybody gets tons of mod points here for blasting these "idiots" and "dolts" for not doing their jobs. I have no vested interest, but for crying out loud, at least these folks are indeed doing their jobs!
No matter what we may think of the concept, this is the way the USPTO works by law. If you don't like it, don't complain about the examiners, complain about the law that chartered them, and complain to somebody that can do something about it.
How many letters have any of you written to your representatives recently?
Parent
Patents on advertising? (Score:3, Funny)
If only I had patented the blink tag and pop-ups. Either I might have prevented those nightmares; or I could have extracted royalties for infringment. Win-win!
Shame on you Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm (Score:2, Insightful)
Contrasting... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Contrasting... (Score:2)
Which still leaves considerable scope for it to be vile, unfair, anti-competetive and counter-productive.
Software patents are a bad thing. Even the slightly-less-bad-than-the-others ones.
Pastor Google (Score:3, Funny)
Shameless, shameless we adore thee
God of the web, lord of search
Personal Info we all give thee
Leaving our data in the lurch
We don't care, we just hate Bill Gates
We know you don't do evil
Will you change? We don't think about it
We just want e-mail retrieval
All thy web projects surround me
Your share valuation reflect thy rays
Sheep and fanbois all surround thee
Center of all endless praise
Blog and mail, you never fail
Inventing stuff we've seen before
But like sheep we will still praise thee
And keep clamoring for more
Googleujah, Googleujah, Googleujah, rejoice
All must join the mighty chorus
Which us l33t stars began
Google's love is reignning o'er us
Our fawning love is part o'the plan
Always singing, never thinking
What they'll do when THEY are king
We just enjoy your hyperlinking
And wondering what new toy you will bring
Our privacy is shrinking
Personal privacy - wishful thinking
"Pastor Google" serving free thinkers since never.
Re:Pastor Google (Score:2)
Don't hate the player, hate the game (Score:4, Insightful)
Advertising is most (if not all) of their revenue. They'd be silly not to try to protect it. How would you feel if your google stock dropped 20% because they were trying to be nice and got screwed by a competitor?
Guns are bad, but you still shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight.
Re:Don't hate the player, hate the game (Score:3, Interesting)
That doesn't work either - then you're advertising to your competitors what you're going to be launching in a year.
What would work is getting a patent accepted, launching your product, then making the patent public domain (as in, no-one ever has to pay a license for it, how
While it appears (Score:4, Insightful)
The current state of technology patents is dreadful. To us technology people, many of the patents just appear to be common sense? Patents are being granted left and right for things that just seem normal and easy to us. Unfortunately, that is the way things are...for now. If you are operating a business, it is in your best interest to try and patent everything you do. If you don't, someone else will and then sue you for infringing on their patents. Trust me, the cost of trying to file patents is nothing compared to the cost of being sued for patent infringement.
So don't blame Google or Microsoft or Amazon. For lack of a better euphemism, don't hate the player, hate the game.
Google "don't be evil" is just PR (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft did this the article summary would be critical, instead of a subtle compliment.
You're all whores.
Think in terms of aggregates (Score:4, Insightful)
Google on the whole seem to remain a force for good. The cynic in me does wonder how long that can last after going public, but on balance I'm a long way from consigning Google to the Bad Guy List
However, software patents remain evil, even if it's Google that holds them. I just thought that bore repeating.
Parent
Re:at this point.. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:at this point.. (Score:3, Funny)
In Soviet Russia... (Score:2)
Backpedal to avoid the drug issue (Score:2)
Hmm . . . what about those inventions that take longer than 5 years to bring from patent to market?
OK, backpedal to this: Patents on an invention that is implementable on a general purpose computer in the prior art, using input and output devices in the prior art, connected to a network in the prior art, should last only five years after grant.
Re:Simplest change to help the US patent problem.. (Score:3, Insightful)
The end result is