USPTO Grants Bezos Patent On '60s-Era Chargebacks 144
theodp writes "Chargebacks on computing resources are certainly nothing new, dating to the '60s. But five decades later, the USPTO has deemed Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos' invention — Dynamic Pricing of Web Services Utilization — worthy of a new patent. From the patent: 'Utilization of a storage resource may be measured in terms of a quantity of data stored (e.g., bytes, megabytes (MB), gigabytes (GB), etc.) per unit of time (e.g., second, day, month, etc.). Similarly, communication bandwidth utilization may be measured in terms of a quantity of data transmitted per unit of time (e.g., megabits per second). Processing resource utilization may be measured as an aggregate number of units of processing effort (e.g., central processing unit (CPU) cycles, transactions, etc.) utilized, or as a rate of processing effort utilization per unit of time (e.g., CPU cycles or transactions per second).' Sound familiar, Greyglers? Another example of why it's not wise to grant software patents when people don't know much about computer history."
Re:Shit! (Score:3, Funny)
No, increase the budget instead: give perks to employees that deny patents like this.
Sorry, but someones already patented that...
Re:Don't care (Score:4, Funny)
No. It's all the fault of the bankers. Do try to keep your scapegoats straight.
Re:Shit! (Score:5, Funny)
No, increase the budget instead: give perks to employees that deny patents like this.
Sorry, but someones already patented that...
Can we patent this type of reply on Slashdot so that we don't get the inevitable trite "that's been patented" responses? I mean heck... at try and be clever and original if you're going to pull out that crusty relic of a response.
Re:Shit! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Shit! (Score:4, Funny)
No, increase the budget instead: give perks to employees that deny patents like this.
Sorry, but someones already patented that...
Can we patent this type of reply on Slashdot so that we don't get the inevitable trite "that's been patented" responses? I mean heck... at try and be clever and original if you're going to pull out that crusty relic of a response.
But that hasn't been patented though. Rewarding an employee has been patented though for having/learning to do their job properly. Patent application number: 20100023384. [faqs.org]
"Sound Familiar" (Score:5, Funny)
From the patent: 'Utilization of a storage resource may be measured in terms of a quantity of data stored (e.g., bytes, megabytes (MB), gigabytes (GB), etc.) per unit of time (e.g., second, day, month, etc.). Similarly, communication bandwidth utilization may be measured in terms of a quantity of data transmitted per unit of time (e.g., megabits per second). Processing resource utilization may be measured as an aggregate number of units of processing effort (e.g., central processing unit (CPU) cycles, transactions, etc.) utilized, or as a rate of processing effort utilization per unit of time (e.g., CPU cycles or transactions per second).' Sound familiar, Greyglers?
It should, since it's part of a description about the art generally. I mean, if you're going to quote mine in a biased effort to show that the patent is invalid, why not go for this:
For example, in some embodiments computing resource 100 may include tangible resources such as computer systems (e.g., standalone or rack-mounted systems), storage devices (e.g., magnetic/optical disk storage, tape storage, etc.), wired or wireless network communication devices (e.g., Local Area Network (LAN)/Wide Area Network (WAN) devices and/or media), input/output devices, or other types of computing devices.
Oh, no, they just patented every computer system, storage device, and network!
I mean, heck... if you're spreading FUD, why not go all the way?
Re:Brainless (Score:3, Funny)
Isn't brainless an absolute?
Like saying "a little pregnant" - either you are or you aren't.