Google Patents Bring WiFi Down To Earth

[jmiller]

One day, my pie in the sky will be crumbs on a plate. Full-bellied, my GoogleNet wireless connection will intuitively retrieve an ad for Alka-Seltzer; the bubbly concoction plop-plop fizz-fizzes with tiny executive voices admitting in fizzy whispers, “yes, Jason, Google’s full of it.”

On March 16th, three wireless patent applications were published by the US Patent & Trademark office, submitted by Google employees. The applications, in large comforting letters at the top, announce the subject of their protection:

Patent #20060058019: Method and system for dynamically modifying the appearance of browser screens on a client device.

In one embodiment, a connection of a client device to a wireless access point is identified. Further, the appearance of a screen presented on the client device is modified to reflect the brand associated with a provider of the wireless access point.

Patent #20060059043: Method and system to provide wireless access at a reduced rate

Methods and system for providing wireless access at a reduced rate. In one embodiment, access to a WAP is provided to an end-user at a rate subsidized by a first entity. The first entity includes advertisements in an end-user view.

Patent #20060059044: Method and system to provide advertisements based on wireless access points

Methods and system to provide advertisements in a view of an end user accessing a wireless access point. The advertisements are related to the WAP based on a predetermined criterion.

I’m bad at math, let’s double check. System for reducing wireless rates + way to serve ads based on wireless access points + technology to alter browser to show sponsors of access points = x.

When CNet asked Google about the patents, the Internet advertising authority responded with a wordy “so what?”

"Like many companies, we file patent applications on a variety of ideas that our employees may come up with. Some of those ideas later mature into real products or services; some don't," a company representative said. "Prospective product announcements should not be inferred from our patent applications."

But, but, but, but…didn’t they just last month join forces with Earthlink to propose a two-tiered wireless citywide service to San Francisco? Well yeah, because Google and Earthlink believe in open access to the worlds information.

"We have submitted this proposal because at Google we're focused on creating new technologies that make it easier for people to quickly access the world's information,” said Google.

“Customers shouldn’t be tied to their desks, or to a single provider, to get the Internet experience they want. Both EarthLink and Google recognize this and are attempting to provide great service and choice in San Francisco,” said Earthlink.

A little while back, Robert X. Cringely asserted that Google would not morph into an Internet service provider because ISP’s are “lousy businesses.” But one thing missed here is that advertising and media companies are not lousy businesses. Google is morphing into a network, and teaming up with ISP’s to deliver content and advertising.

Let’s do some more math. Google buys up dark fiber nationwide + alphabet soup of speedy extra capacity Internet technology + huge databases + wireless advertising patents + deals with Earthlink + deals with media companies + WiFi testing in San Francisco= x.

Google, notoriously secretive, has a preference for hedged statements with phrasing like “at this time” and “announcements should not be inferred.” A maybe-maybe-not stance is protection against failure. No promises equals no liability.

In addition to that, the wireless ad-supported network they may or may not be envisioning will face fierce opposition from huge telecommunications companies who don’t willing let anybody cut in on their turf, not even for emergencies.

Is the GoogleNet a pie in the sky? Maybe, but it’s losing altitude all the time.

[flood6]

San Francisco + subsidized internet access = x^3 ...heh.

This all looks pretty cool. I never minded the way Opera used to handle their free (gratis) browser version with ads near the toolbar, this sounds like something similar. In fact it sounds really similar to what Google is trying to patent. Another possible "prior art" hurdle for that patent comes from this free dial-up service I used for a while when I got out of the Air Force; it was called Blue Light and was provided by Kmart. You got free unlimited dial-up access, there was just a thin frame near the top that had ads on it. Later they cut it back to 40 free hours per month and offered a "premium" service where you could buy more time, by then I'd moved on to greener pastures.

Anyway, I didn't read all about those patents (they always seem so vague) but how different could this be from what Opera and Blue Light did? Is it really so unique as to require a patent? My favorite patent is Method of swinging on a swing: that's right some schmuck patented sitting on a swing "side saddle" and moving perpendicular to the typical swinging direction. The intellectual property laws in this country have gone bananas.

[uhpl508]

Is anyone else bothered by Google and many, many other companies who seem to just patent concepts in the most vague of forms? Didn't they essentially file a patent for personalization of a website for the user some time back? Yes, they go into great detail about it but realistically it is just an amalgamation of simple processes that are, I assume, public domain. Is it really fair to take previously demonstrated, widely known concepts, put them in a group and file for a patent?

For anyone who reads the patents in detail, which I don't, can you explain this?

[DrTandem1]

"Doing the math" I would say that they are simply going to allow free or low-cost access to WiFi LANs for those that will allow them to spam them with ads across their browser and/or browser skins.

Google, no longer search, just a major spam purveyor. Don't get me wrong, Google is against spam...just so long as it's not their spam.