
Amazon has a patent to keep people from comparison shopping in stores - panarky
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/06/16/amazon-has-a-patent-to-keep-you-from-comparison-shopping-while-youre-in-its-stores/
======
dbingham
It shouldn't matter that this is an obvious thing to do or easily circumvented
(for the time being).

It is 1) an invasion of privacy and 2) anti-competitive behavior.

Version 1 may be easily circumvented, but future versions could easily be
tighter and more difficult to circumvent. For example, a contract with the
mobile providers could make this something that no longer depends on in store
WiFi usage.

This is the sort of thing that should be stopped in its infancy.

~~~
ams6110
In theory, I don't have a problem with a retailer offering free WiFi but
limiting it either for QoS or to block certain sites or protocols. It's their
bandwidth and they should be able to offer it to the public on whatever terms
they want.

As with anything, if you aren't paying for it then you are not the customer.

Now, if they somehow convinced Verizon or ATT to interfere with the network
access that I am paying for, that would be a problem and I'd stop doing
business with both the carrier and the retailer.

~~~
devoply
> Now, if they somehow convinced Verizon or ATT to interfere with the network
> access that I am paying for, that would be a problem and I'd stop doing
> business with both the carrier and the retailer.

Considering the plethora of choices, you would definitely win. /s Goes back to
old George Carlin joke about belonging to a club and you not being in it.

~~~
tomjakubowski
Not to be confused with Groucho Marx's joke about belonging to clubs. :-)

Carlin's bit, for reference.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUaqFzZLxU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUaqFzZLxU)

~~~
losteverything
Omg. He sounds a little like trump and he also 'sounds' like trump. Great
share

~~~
ccrush
Carlin hated government and both parties with a passion, but he leaned a bit
liberal by his own admission. That said, he would be disappointed to hear he's
being compared to Donald Trump. See his bits on the "business man" and
"politicians" for reference.

------
gene91
They could also increase the online price (for websites they own) to be the
same as the in-store price.

I've seen something similar to this at Target. Target.com is often cheaper
than Target stores. And Target store matches Target.com prices. However, if
you use Target app (not Target mobile/desktop website) in a Target store, the
price shown will be the in-store price instead of online price. The Target
Android app requests permissions to access precise location, pair with
Bluetooth devices, and view WiFi connection.

~~~
JoshTriplett
> They could also increase the online price (for websites they own) to be the
> same as the in-store price.

That seems like the wrong way around. If you're in a store, and checking
Amazon, Amazon would want you to think the product is cheaper on Amazon, so
you don't buy it from the store you're in.

~~~
rcthompson
This is a technology to be deployed in Amazon's brick-and-mortar stores, which
used to be an oxymoron in the past but is increasingly no longer the case.

------
crazy1van
Seems more likely that Amazon got this patent to prevent some other brick and
mortar store from acquiring it and blocking Amazon.com.

~~~
opportune
Yeah, just like that oh-so-reasonable 1-click purchase they patented. Good
thing they never abused that patent.

~~~
Animats
That was very clever. The insight was to make both buying and undoing the buy
easy. For a few minutes after an Amazon one-click buy, you can undo it. That's
what made one-click purchases non-scary. Most E-commerce systems still don't
get this. Once you've clicked "buy", it's "Mwaaah, we have your money now,
sucker!"

~~~
ryandrake
Granted this is a totally inadequate solution, but in all cases where I've
made an online order from a reputable seller and wanted to cancel it before it
shipped, I have been able to call the business over the phone, provide them
with the invoice number, and successfully cancel the order. I've only had
problems in cases where "I should have known better than to order on that
site" to begin with.

~~~
sbierwagen
_I 'm_ perfectly fine calling someone on the phone, but many other millennials
strongly dislike phone conversations.

~~~
pilsetnieks
Every reputable seller also has email. In Amazon's case you don't even need
that, you just need to click a button.

~~~
sbierwagen

      In Amazon's case you don't even need that, you just need 
      to click a button.
    

Yes, that was the point of the thread. On Amazon's site, order cancellations
are automated and can be done on the website, while for many other online
stores you have to contact a human to do it manually.

------
mankash666
1\. Use VPN 2\. Regardless of free Wi-Fi, it's illegal in many countries to
tamper with traffic. Net neutrality anyone? 3\. Kudos to WaPo's editorial
integrity. Despite being a Jeff Bezos entity, it isn't afraid to publish items
Amazon doesn't want you to know about

~~~
concatime
No need for a VPN. Maybe using HTTPS wouldn't aloud them to see the data? Hope
no MITM. But, you can always change DNS server (or use DNSCrypt).

~~~
cookiecaper
There is a need for a VPN. Most public access points perform some traffic
manipulation and I absolutely believe that some intentionally block and/or
modify data to obscure some data from people who are in-store. In fact, I
believe Best Buy was already caught doing this with their own site; in-store
APs wouldn't reflect the price that was really shown on bestbuy.com. ...

Ah, it seems that Best Buy did this but only on internal workstations, so that
when the employee would access bestbuy.com, the discounted price online
wouldn't show up: [https://consumerist.com/2007/03/02/best-buy-confirms-the-
exi...](https://consumerist.com/2007/03/02/best-buy-confirms-the-existence-of-
its-secret-website/) . However, they could trivially do this via wifi.

While searching for this, I also found this:
[http://adage.com/article/digital/retailer-jo-ann-aims-
retarg...](http://adage.com/article/digital/retailer-jo-ann-aims-retarget-
store-wi-fi-users/308287/) , which registers the device MAC on the backend and
uses it to track how many times a user has entered the store (that is,
connected to the store's wifi). Even VPN wouldn't stop this from happening,
you'd need to randomize your phone's MAC address.

Public wifi is convenient but we shouldn't be naive about it. Companies _are_
using it for their own purposes.

~~~
concatime
Even randomizing MAC seems somehow useless [0]. And all `private` VPNs without
logs are pretty much non-free (as in money).

So what's the easiest solution for a lambda user!?

[0]
[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/10/mac_address_randomi...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/10/mac_address_randomization/)

------
__jal
Reason #34 for taking a more adversarial relationship with the surveillance-
happy plays: they started gaslighting us in their stores.

One reason among many that Bluetooth and Wifi are off on my phone when I leave
somewhere. (Most of the time. I sometimes forget.) Aside from passive
monitoring, we get things like this, where your personal devices become the
equivalent of jailhouse snitches.

I don't see it as an invasion of privacy - it is their wifi. But it is an
example of grabbing after every last nickel without considering ancillary
concerns, like me thinking it is awful, icky, gross behavior and adjusting my
exposure to that shit accordingly.

~~~
crispytx
Poor decision making like this gives capitalism a bad name.

------
nfriedly
I wonder if there could be a "good patent troll" business model where you file
patents on all kinds of user-hostile, anti-consumer bullshit like this and
then sue any company that does it?

~~~
crispytx
Great point. It would be nice if that's what they're doing.

~~~
maldeh
Not very educated on patent matters, but isn't there any requirement for
plaintiffs to demonstrate patent utilization, or at the very least abstract
plans of utilization, no matter how impractical? Making a public claim that
the patent would never be utilized but only used defensively, would make that
difficult.

------
qubex
Pretty obvious, and pretty trivially circumvented by _not_ sending traffic
over the in-store Wi-Fi network. (Do such things really exit?? Never seen one
here in Italy)

~~~
sixdimensional
Well, even though most stores don't acknowledge it, how much do you want to
bet there are stores that install 3G/4G cell jammers to prevent you from using
your mobile to look up anything while in-store? I know a few places I shop
where my cell coverage "mysteriously" drops to nil inside the store and I have
long suspected it's not just the concrete walls.

~~~
RIMR
If you suspect cell jamming, and you're in the USA, contact the FCC and report
the business. The mere fact that it interferes with 911 is enough to send a
store manager to prison. If they can prove that an emergency vehicle every got
close enough to the business to be potentially affected, the business could
see hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.

The FCC could just park a van in front of the store for 3 minutes and their
tools would verify that a jammer was in use.

Here's the details on anti-jamming laws, and a list of people who have had
their ass handed to them by the FCC for doing it:
[https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-
enforcement](https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement)

~~~
sixdimensional
Good to know this. I don't think it's outright cell jamming but something
where voice service is still passable but data service basically cannot
function due to packet loss, etc.

Would be interesting to try to detect if such interference is present on the
right frequencies, or if it is just a natural effect and truly not
intentional.

Thanks for sharing the info.

~~~
prostoalex
> something where voice service is still passable but data service basically
> cannot function due to packet loss, etc.

That pretty much describes 99% of indoor mobile coverage out there. The only
exception being buildings that have ponied up for a femtocell.

------
loco5niner
Ironic considering their "Price Check" android app:
[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.amazon.pri...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.amazon.pricecheck&hl=en)

~~~
RIMR
Not really. Now that they own the patent, they can refuse to license it to
anyone who may create a product that blocks their app.

------
syphilis2
I don't understand the extent of patents such as this. Does this mean if I
have a shop with a public WiFi connection that I cannot block or redirect
users from competitor's websites to my own without infringing on an Amazon
patent? In general, I'm wondering does this patent obstruct me from
implementing something similar?

~~~
crispytx
Someone else posted that this is why they think Amazon may have filed this
patent - a sort of "Good Guy Patent Troll" move.

------
ijustwanttovote
I was trying to price match Amazon when I was at Target. Target now has their
own device that looks up Amazon's prices. Not shocked to see two different
price tags on my device and Targets

------
smaili
Yesterday -
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14566264](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14566264)

------
ckuhl
Hypothetically, could they be even more sinister and modify competitor's
prices to appear higher, so that you never even notice what they're doing?

------
mars4rp
Interesting that it the article is in WashingtonPost!

------
jetti
Could somebody please help me understand how this patent would be enforceable?
I mean, wouldn't it be invalidated by any of the public wifi's that prevent
you from accessing the internet until you visit their log in page? Or does the
specifics and niche of this patent actually matter?

~~~
kbutler
Specifics always matter in getting a patent granted.

They sometimes matter in a court enforcing a patent.

They rarely matter in getting a lawyer to send a cease & desist letter.

------
lemoncucumber
Next from Amazon: free home/cell internet that works for everything but
competitors' websites

~~~
crispytx
LOL. They already have a MotoG phone they sell at a discount. The only catch
is they spam you with ads. It's too bad they can't have a little more
integrity when it comes to stuff like this.

------
TulliusCicero
Seems likely to be a defensive patent.

~~~
dsr_
Then they could issue a press release: "We here at Amazon are very concerned
about... and so we have patented this in order to make sure that nobody does
this awful horrible thing."

~~~
djrogers
Pretty sure that would be a quick way for someone to invalidate your patent
claim.

~~~
monochromatic
On what basis?

------
leoh
I have a crazier theory about this. After logging on to a WiFi router, the
router could report to Amazon that some customer is in shop X. When that
customer goes online to shop (for example, Whole Foods), Amazon could show
higher prices.

------
RIMR
I think Amazon might only own the patent on this to prevent others from doing
the same thing.

If there was any app in the world you would use to mobile window shop, it
would be Amazon.

------
aj7
Weird. I remember being pissed off at a Home Depot price. So I bought it on
Amazon, right at Home Depot. I bet half of you have done something like this.

~~~
david-cako
for as long as I've had proper internet access on my phone. since 2009 at
least.

it's great too, because it's forcing retailers like best buy to at least be
mildly competitive in pricing. I will actually buy things at best buy now if I
really want them immediately, but it often requires telling them to give me
the online price since it's marked up in store (which I guess is another form
of this price comparing behavior).

~~~
thefalcon
Yes, I only ever bother to go into Best Buy because I know they will price
match Amazon (and their own price.)

I recently realized that even Wal Mart had lower prices for some things
online, and now I have to go through the hassle of having them price match
their own website when making certain purchases.

------
Theodores
The problem here is that people that use in store WiFi are too cheap to pay
for their own 4g bandwidth. So these folk are frugal not big spenders. They
will need to work with telcos to deep packet inspect customers triangulated to
the store locations. And then to stop people shopping online.

With destination shopping, e.g. to buy a new sofa or bicycle, customers have
invariably been online already and chose the store that way.

~~~
bgirard
> With destination shopping, e.g. to buy a new sofa or bicycle, customers have
> invariably been online already and chose the store that way.

Not necessarily. For $100-$1000 items I'll walk into a store without an intent
to buy that day to price shop and if I'm tempted to buy I'll quickly check
online and see if the store will price match. In the bay area I've actually
had the store price match their own online store even though in store price
had a '20% off sale'.

Seems pretty common for bay area stores to sell above their online prices and
price match if you ask.

~~~
hayden592
It works this way in the rest of the country. Not just the bay area.

------
loco5niner
Key line:

> But Amazon now has the technology to prevent that type of behavior when
> customers enter any of its physical stores and log onto the WiFi networks
> there.

------
PatentTroll
The article says Amazon 'won' the patent or alternatively the patent was
'awarded' to Amazon. The USPTO only "grants" patents. It may seem like nit
picking semantics but it presents an incorrect image of the USPTO to
uninformed readers. And it also exposes the authors lack of knowledge on
patents, discrediting the whole of the article.

------
JosephLark
Semi-offtopic: Does Amazon.com in America tend to come out ahead if you
comparison shop against it in retail stores? Up here in Canada, Amazon.ca can
often be a few dollars more expensive for simple items than I can easily get
in retail shops. So although I would like to shop more online, I still have a
preference for shopping in physical stores.

------
AndrewKemendo
A much better implementation of this would be to inspect the data that users
are requesting, then analyze the price difference between products they are
looking at online vs in-store and then dynamically change the price in real
time.

Amazon definitely has the technology to make this happen.

~~~
bo1024
An encrypted connection like https should be able to prevent this, however.

------
smoyer
Amazon's next patent - "Effective faraday cages for large retail spaces"

It's illegal to jam or otherwise interfere with other's radio transmissions
but it's not illegal to block them from your premises.

------
otaviokz
So, basically they block access to competitor's sites via their captive wifi?
The article looks, smells and sounds like click bait.

------
djhworld
I'm very reticent to connect to any public wifi network anyway.

Not saying the cellular network is any better

------
shmerl
What else did they patent, may be shopping itself?

------
gigatexal
just turn off wifi as the patent works by reading your traffic whilst in store

~~~
diggernet
Don't even need to turn off WiFi. Just don't connect to store WiFi.

------
lechiffre10
So weird seeing this on the Washington Post considering it belongs to Jeff
Bezos

