Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Patents Spam

Prince of Pop-ups 543

Ric writes "From the article lead paragraph: 'If you hate pop-up ads, you might blame Brian Shuster. A long-time figure in the Internet pornography world, Shuster recently received a patent for the ad format and is now looking to make some money off the sites that use it. And that's just the beginning - Shuster has a long list of pending patents, including one for pop-up audio ads that cannot be turned off.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Prince of Pop-ups

Comments Filter:
  • Excellent!! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Binestar ( 28861 ) * on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:06PM (#5902330) Homepage
    If this guy can start charging people for using popups then these webpages won't pay and popups will start dying off. While a patent like this is mostly a bad thing, the side effects are good!

    Of course I use mozilla with popup filtering enabled, so it's not really that much of an issue to me. =)
  • by ManoMarks ( 574691 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:06PM (#5902334) Journal
    To inundate him with junk mail, of course, and also to hit him up for money. Or just hit him. No, wait, I'm a Quaker. I keep forgetting that...
  • Good! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by earthforce_1 ( 454968 ) <earthforce_1 AT yahoo DOT com> on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:08PM (#5902367) Journal
    Hopefully he charges astronomical licence fees for both "innovations" retroactive to the day he filed. Hopefully that will be the nail in the coffin that drives these scourges off the desktop.

    Heck, I wish somebody had patented spam as well!
  • Re:Excellent!! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by invultor ( 669012 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:10PM (#5902392)
    Yeah, but just watch the guy throwing a fit over popup blocking as his next step towards World Domination, and start throwing threats of DMCA breach around. Someone who knows better, how possible is this? Could the whole TiVo controversy be translated to the web, too?
  • Re:Hooray! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bhsurfer ( 539137 ) <bhsurfer@gmail.MENCKENcom minus author> on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:18PM (#5902509)
    I'm not sure that giving this type of scumbag millions of dollars to play with would prevent any future annoying web "functionality". Hell, it might be providing him R&D money to do develop ways to REALLY piss people off...
  • Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)

    by molarmass192 ( 608071 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:23PM (#5902582) Homepage Journal
    Thank you, exactly what I was thinking. It's a feature of JavaScript. This is like me patenting the META REFRESH tag. Sad part is I'd probably be able to get a patent for it.
  • by ncc74656 ( 45571 ) <scott@alfter.us> on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:24PM (#5902592) Homepage Journal
    I got the first unrequested popup I've ever run across in Mozilla when I was reading a NYTimes article linked in this article [slashdot.org]. The ad-filtering proxy [taz.net.au] I use at least made it a blank popup, but a change to the config file fixed it so that it closes as soon as it opens. We could only be so lucky that the Times would be targeted by Shuster.

    (The popups appear when you click a "next page" or "previous page" link in the article, so Mozilla must be treating it as a requested popup. In addition to a whitelist of sites that are allowed to throw popups, Mozilla needs a blacklist of sites that are never allowed to throw popups.)

  • by SomeOtherGuy ( 179082 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:25PM (#5902598) Journal
    I was asked a question by a co-worker yesterday, and did not have a solid answer. Since it somewhat relates to this story and google did nothing but bring back ads for popup blockers, I thought I would loose it to the /. people. Simple question -- Anybody who has used Firebird, Mozilla, Opera, etc -- has seen how much better the browsing experience is without countless popups. What is stopping Microsoft from putting out a version or patch of/to IE that has this feature? I know that the conspirecy theorists could speculate to no end on this one, but is there a simple answer?
  • But.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:42PM (#5902834) Journal
    I thought theft of computing services was illegal.
  • by doublem ( 118724 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:44PM (#5902868) Homepage Journal
    "interact with the browser to modify or control one or more of the browser functions, such that the user is directed to a predesignated site or page, instead of accessing the site or page typically associated with the selected browser function."

    So he patented misleading people via a web browser...

    Intersting.
  • by ceejayoz ( 567949 ) <cj@ceejayoz.com> on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @01:58PM (#5903021) Homepage Journal
    What is stopping Microsoft from putting out a version or patch of/to IE that has this feature?

    The fact that many of their MSN.com sites use 'em?
  • by parnasus ( 321445 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @02:07PM (#5903107)
    From the article:
    In lab tests, the response rate to what might be called "pop-up audio" has been outstanding, Shuster said, meaning such ads may soon be interrupting plenty of Web surfers, or at least those who don't manage to turn off their speakers fast enough.
    Combine that with an earlier article on DRM [slashdot.org] and you'll have speakers you CAN'T turn down/off, unplug from the wall, or flip a circuit breaker to kill.

    I realize the above is an Orwellian outlook on the stangle-hold Microsoft is hoping to foist on us, but DRM is a slippery slope indeed. Who knows how far down one will go once one gets started.
  • by Tiger Smile ( 78220 ) <james@dor[ ].com ['nan' in gap]> on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @02:09PM (#5903134) Homepage

    With a HREF you can set a taget window. If that window does not exist it's greated. Popped-up, as it were. You can place any kind of content in that window. Java script allows you to pop this extra target up with a specific size. This is all a given.

    At the time this functionality was created there were ads on the web. They were a known type of content. The idea was that they would bring in money. We all know this.

    This guys "innovation" is placing an add in new target window? The US Patent Office is grteat pleace. I'm sure it was totally non-obvious.

    Patents in the US should be halted, until something can be done. This is causing harm to us all. Not this Patent issued. Issued falsely I'd say. It's the fact that a patent limits the rest of us. It allows an inventor(not in this case) to own an idea for a while.

    Owned ideas are bad when they are ebvous, such as this one. To know when is and is not ebvous is way beyond the scope of our government. These are not the simplier times when Patents were penned into being in this country.

    Patents should be rolled back, and used only in areas where innovation needs to be stoked. Computer and tech innovation is on a roll, and patens will only halt that trend.

    It harms all of us to retard our progress and innovation by allowing a patnet office which cannot see the obvious from the innovaiton.

    -- James Dornan
  • Re:Hooray! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by _ph1ux_ ( 216706 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @02:23PM (#5903302)
    Because pop-ups will not go away. What he is claiming is that he invented and patented the pop-up, now that many people use it he wants to get paid. But the likelihood that he will get paid is yet to be seen - the likelihood that the pop-ups will go away very very doubtful.

    However, more telling about where blame for frustrations will lie - is in the quote regarding the popups with sound that you cannot turn off. This is VERY upsetting.

    I OWN MY COMPUTER - its fully 100% a resource of MINE and nobody else. I also PAY for my internet access, by the month.

    If he wants to force feed me ads - then he better damn well PAY me. And protect himself while walking around in public.

    Seriously - this is a major concern of mine and I am sure, many others.

    Advertising is getting totally out of hand and something needs to be done. I can understand certain forms of advertising, like on free TV stations - where I am getting the service (TV for free) and in return I am agreeing to being subjected to ads.

    However in any service where I actually pay for it - I should be asked, paid or otherwise consulted before being subjected to advertising.

    In fact I am in the process of starting an ISP where advertising of ANY kind is absolutely forbidden and technically (as much as possible) prevented. No details on how I am doing this, sorry... but one thing is that for a nominally higher rate you can have an ISP that will not tolerate any sort of advertising to its clients.

    Advertising is polluting the world we live in and even our minds with unproductive thoughts - and actually detracts from our quality of life. I hope to change this.

    On a related note - would you sign up on this ISP?

  • by ManoMarks ( 574691 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @02:42PM (#5903499) Journal
    Whenever I move, within 2 weeks the advertising starts to catch up with me. Within 6 months, I'm inundated at the same rate, by the same companies.
  • by t_allardyce ( 48447 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @02:43PM (#5903511) Journal
    This is all total crap. All his patents are laughable and rely on system specifics - ie, windows and IE. HTML (lets forget about flash shall we) is a completely open system. Your computer requests it, it is sent to your computer, your computer deals with it as you wish. This effectively means that if you dont want your own computer to do something, then it wont.

    All you need is the correct algorithm to process the HTML/Java whatever in the right way so that it doesn't bother you with pop-ups, audio or whatever. Has anyone invented or patented a method of blocking malicious code? yes its called a virus scanner (or virus scanner packaged as an ad-filter) and it just so happens that HTML and Java are a hell of allot easier to deal with than _real_ malicious code.

    You could say this man is patenting virus methods or something like that, if it was a outlook-express visual basic script i dont think the patent office would see it in quite the same way? If not then let me be the first to invent a method of advertising that involves emailing itself to everyone on your address book.
  • Counter attack? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @04:11PM (#5904552)
    Silly thoughts on saving the web:
    If we were all wise and slick and such, we'd think up some of the most annoying ways our browers could be perverted into advertisements and then we would patent them.

    Then, to discourage the use of said annoying tactic, ask for exceptionally high per-use licensing fees for the patent.
  • Re:Hooray! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by neptuneb1 ( 261497 ) on Wednesday May 07, 2003 @05:58PM (#5905589)
    Your analogy doesn't make any sense here. Sure, you aren't getting free internet access, but you are getting free internet content. Look at Slashdot, for instance. You can pay slashdot to turn the ads off for you, but that's because you're paying slashdot, the one providing the content. Surprisingly enough, it costs money to run a website, and the only way that websites have of making money is by either charging users for access (which none of us want) or by having advertisers pay them for some ad space (which we all hate, but have learned to live with).

    Personally, I have a big moral problem with you trying to start an ISP that doesn't allow ads unless you plan on sending a monthly check to EVERY single website your users visited that would have normally contained an ad.

    As much as we all hate it, advertising is a necessary evil if you want internet content to remain more-or-less free.

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Working...