Anyone know if a company other than Apple currently licenses 1-Click?
E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
141–150 of 237 posts
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#142[deleted]
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use amazon for many of the reasons you listed - but the first thing I do on a new device is turn off 1-click. I can't see this patent changing the game for anyone.
On the other hand, many more people actually do use 1-click. A tip: if you ever find yourself saying "why does a company have X feature/product, I don't use it, no one uses it!" you might be right on the first statement but you're almost certainly wrong on the second. It wouldn't be there if no one used it.
Of course - if nobody used it Amazon would remove the button. I doubt that adding 1-click to some other site will greatly increase their sales - that is all I'm saying.
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#144Setting aside the madness that is the patent itself ever being granted, what I found most interesting on that post was that this could now (possibly) become an actual web standard in the future: > the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has started writing a draft proposal for one click buying methods. The W3C site itself has a number of web payment related proposals in progress[1]. The Payment Request API, in particular…
I found > the patent will expire and the technology behind it will be free to be used by any e-commerce site particularly specious. There is no "technology" behind it. It was a concept or busines process that the vaguaries of patent law deemed worthy of rewarding. Not to mention that any technology ("source code") Amazon used to implement the patent will remain under copyright essentially indefinitely.
Business process can be considered a technology, i.e. technical procedure. Also, since they got the patent, wouldn't they have to pass tests for previous works, novelty, and obviousness?
And, why shouldn't something be patentable, just because it's easy to replicate?
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
I found > the patent will expire and the technology behind it will be free to be used by any e-commerce site particularly specious. There is no "technology" behind it. It was a concept or busines process that the vaguaries of patent law deemed worthy of rewarding. Not to mention that any technology ("source code") Amazon used to implement the patent will remain under copyright essentially indefinitely.
Are you just quibbling about the semantics used in the article? Or are you saying nobody else can implement "1 click" even after the patent expires... because of copyright? Edit: Was an honest question, I've upvoted all the answers as I found them interesting, not understanding the barrage of downvotes shrug
[deleted]
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#146Setting aside the madness that is the patent itself ever being granted, what I found most interesting on that post was that this could now (possibly) become an actual web standard in the future: > the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has started writing a draft proposal for one click buying methods. The W3C site itself has a number of web payment related proposals in progress[1]. The Payment Request API, in particular…
> madnessRe: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Free shipping for what delivery time frame? Amazon Prime's fees are quite small compared to direct shipping costs with carriers. It depends on the product type, of course, but typically third-party sellers are already on thin margins selling on Amazon. It's very likely that "drop a few bucks off the Amazon price and offer free shipping" means they're selling to you at a loss.
I'm not generally in a rush; if they can get it here in a week or two that's fine as long as they tell me what day it'll be here. I'm not saying it's a great deal for the company, but what can you expect consumers to do if Amazon has the cheapest price AND prime shipping you already paid for? That said some companies at least raise their prices on purpose when posting to Amazon in order to meet their standards for th…
Most of the time I'm not in a rush, but I still pick 2-day Prime because it gets delivered to my door by UPS or sometimes FedEx. If I select slower shipping or order from another site it might come USPS or SurePost (handed off to the USPS). Best case with USPS is it ends up in the mail box down the road - worst case I have to drive to town and get it at the post office.
If Amazon would let me pick a slow option that was still UPS/Fedex, I'd do it. Same with other sites, sometimes I won't buy from them if they only ship USPS and I know it won't fit in the box.
For me, Prime is great because it means most thing come to my door at no extra (other than the yearly fee) cost.
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#148"They have proposed ways of storing cards and address data in the browser..."
Oh hell no! Just what we need, yet another reason for people to attack your browser. Don't we already suggest to never use the "remember your password" button? Now, it's "remember your credit card." No. Please, just no.
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I stopped shopping at Wal-Mart around 2009. When I returned to the US in 2012, I saw Amazon as the new Wal-Mart and stopped shopping there. I realize Target and Kroger probably implement the same tactics as WM now, same with eBay/Newegg sellers and Amazon, so I realize it's more symbolic than anything.
Do you have good resources in mind on Walmart's harmful practices? Yes, I can search internet but looking for long sophisticated essays or even good books on the topic that you may have come across. I am not from US but currently studying here and haven't thought much about this topic. Walmart, Walgreen and Amazon feel too convenient. I would love to learn more on the topic before it becomes a habit.
Going back a quarter century or so, the biggest complaints against Walmart have commonly been thus:
- Extremely aggressive about interrupting unionization attempts.
- Relatively low pay, particularly for the bottom 1/2 of employees.
- They squeeze suppliers to restrain prices to the benefit of consumers. This essentially adds another aggrieved voice in the crowd.
- Then there's a very broad, vague, low value argument about the soul of communities being destroyed by their presence. This premise was particularly common ~15 years ago. It has turned out to be almost entirely bunk, so it's an argument rarely used against them today. Today, the focus is overwhelmingly on pay, specifically that their low wages force tax payers to subsidize said wages.
Most of these arguments collapse upon rational inspection. For example, they universally pay better than mom & pop local stores and employ far more people in small & mid size towns / communities. Then the argument gets flipped: it then gets said that they intentionally pay higher than local competitors, and advocate in favor of higher minimum wage laws, to crush local competition (ie damned if they do, damned if they don't).
The same people that dislike Walmart, you'll find, will frequently lodge 'for the common good' arguments economically. Walmart acts for the good of the many, as they squeeze supplier margins to hold prices down. Somehow saving 200 million people money is turned against them as a negative.
Their low pay is an interesting issue unto itself. Their margins are hyper low, at 2.5% net income margins; their sales have been flat and profits have been falling for years. If they pay each employee just another $4,000 to $5,000 per year, they'd go bankrupt (particularly as they begin the long hard war with Amazon). They're often contrasted with Costco, which pays meaningfully higher wages; however Costco manages that by employing far fewer people per dollar of sales. To match Costco on that, Walmart would have to fire at least half a million people, most of whom have few skills to do any other higher paying jobs.
One of the most fascinating aspects of the low pay / tax payer subsidy issue, is who the tax payers are that are doing the subsidizing: mostly the rich. The top 1/3 in America pay almost all the income taxes that go toward subsidizing Walmart's bottom 1/2 of employees who earn low wages. This almost never gets discussed when the topic comes up, in fact it's aggressively dodged. The people doing the arguing, are overwhelmingly in favor of the rich subsidizing the poor, but for some reason it's not ok when it comes to this (ie they're actually arguing it's bad that the rich tax payers subsidize Walmart's poorest employees, it's comical). This is just a baseless attack on Walmart, because of what they are. The only alternative to having the top 1/3 subsidize Walmart's poorest employees, is to have those employees lose their jobs and then the subsidy goes to 100% instead of being partial as it is today.
Re: E-commerce will evolve next month as Amazon loses the 1-Click patent
#150"They have proposed ways of storing cards and address data in the browser..." Oh hell no! Just what we need, yet another reason for people to attack your browser. Don't we already suggest to never use the "remember your password" button? Now, it's "remember your credit card." No. Please, just no.
Chrome already has an option to remember your credit card. I love it. It means I can be in line for a show, see that the venue has another one coming up, pull up the purchase page on my phone, and have tickets in second. Or my partner can buy tickets to the theater on the way to the theater, seamlessly. Etc. TLDR It's super convenient, and if my credit card details get stolen or whatever, that's Chase's problem, not mine.