Patent 7,970,657 has been awarded to Facebook for "giving gifts via a social network and displaying icons representing assets that have been acquired via the social network". There are 52 claims to the patent, but like with most software patents, claim 1 sums up the patent pretty well (the other claims are details):
1. A method for representing ownership of an asset in a social network environment, the method comprising: receiving a request from a first user of the social network environment to purchase the asset for a second user; recording information about a purchase of the asset from a vendor; associating, by a server for the social networking environment, the purchased asset with a profile of the second user; sending for display to a viewing user an association between the purchased asset and the second user on a feed display page; sending for display to the viewing user, in connection with the association between the purchased asset and the second user, information indicating that a third user, with whom the viewing user has established a connection in the social network, owns the asset, and information including a name of the first user who gave the asset to the second user, on the feed display page.The reason why I think this patent is silly is because this concept is nothing new, nor invented. For example, there have existed online games and communities where you can gift other players certain items or abilities. For example, if Player X gifts player Y 10 gold coins, the game would display "Player X gifted Player Y 10 gold coins!" and that would infringe on this patent. The only real differentiation here is that this patent specifies a "social network", but one could argue that an online game in which a user plays with other real players is also a social network since you can have friends and connections.
Because I believe this concept has already existed for many years, I believe this really is a "silly" patent.
Hey Shauray,
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing your perspective on this patent. I agree with you that this patent is silly because of the above reason, how online games were a form of primitive social network. It seems a bit weird that Facebook was granted a patent for this. They could theoretically exploit this to go after gift-card sharing websites or eBay because those could also be considered "social networks".
Hi Shauray. How's it going? I do agree that obviousness is violated with granting this patent, and it does seem a bit silly, but I would think that this product definitely has some sort of functional purpose. Imagine back in the day when you would have to go out to buy gift cards at retailers. That would take out a significant chunk out of your day and now with online gifting, the process goes out a lot faster. It would've been helpful to include a date filed to see how the patent stands relative to the technology of its time; but all in all, great job!
ReplyDeleteHi Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this silly patent, because I wasn't able to find it during my own research. I appreciate your take on "what is a silly patent?" You definitely defined it by saying that it is a patent with a concept that is not new. I think you forgot whether or not it is obvious, but it is implied. Great post!
Hi Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this silly patent, because I wasn't able to find it during my own research. I appreciate your take on "what is a silly patent?" You definitely defined it by saying that it is a patent with a concept that is not new. I think you forgot whether or not it is obvious, but it is implied. Great post!