
Facebook has now a patent granted on having a user privacy settings page - AhtiK
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=facebook.ASNM.&OS=an%2Ffacebook&RS=AN%2Ffacebook
======
_delirium
The first claim (which is typically the broadest thing claimed):

 _1\. A method comprising: accessing a profile for a user stored in an
electronic database; presenting a first user interface to the user; receiving
a plurality of privacy setting selections provided by the user using the first
user interface, wherein the privacy settings selections identify, for each of
a plurality of different categories of information associated with the user,
one or more other users who can access that category of information; updating
the profile associated with the user to incorporate the plurality of privacy
setting selections; generating, by a processor, a narrative explanation of
which other users can access which categories of information based on the
privacy settings selections, wherein generating the narrative explanation
comprises, for one or more of the privacy settings selections, selecting a
narrative explanation template based on the privacy settings selection,
wherein the narrative explanation template comprises text that identifies a
group of other users who can access a category of information about the user
profile based on the privacy settings selection; and providing the narrative
explanation to the user associated with the profile in a second user interface
after receiving the privacy setting selections provided using the first user
interface._

This seems to be attempting to patent the idea of having a dialog where the
user can select settings, and then a system that explains the current settings
back to the user using templated NLG. Except, limited specifically to privacy
settings. Really at a loss how such standard techniques could constitute an
"invention".

~~~
DanBC
The novel bit is possibly the introduction of constantly changing policies,
and auto-setting the new settings to something less than the user wanted.

------
AhtiK
Correct url for patent 8,225,376 "Dynamically generating a privacy summary":
[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,225,376.PN.&OS=PN/8,225,376&RS=PN/8,225,376)

Due to my linking mistake the original USPTO url started to return a different
patent. A cookie feature and not the user privacy setting patent.

Looks like readwriteweb also covered this yesterday:
[http://www.readwriteweb.com/start/2012/07/mark-zuckerberg-
wi...](http://www.readwriteweb.com/start/2012/07/mark-zuckerberg-wins-
approval-for-his-first-ever-patent-application-from-6-years-ago.php)

~~~
ShellfishMeme
The original link you submitted is very interesting as well. From what I
understand this massive text describes a simple automatic caching strategy.

A part of the system figures out what resources are requested the most and
caches them. Then it sends them over to the client together with a minimum
page skeleton that can request more things once it's loaded. Based on the
cookie, the system knows what additional parts that are being rendered in the
background so once the cached parts are loaded, the remaining things can be
delivered. This makes it possible to instantly respond and start rendering the
website so tasks that maybe take 200ms to compute on the server side don't
delay the response.

This is the first time I read an entire software patent. If all it takes to
get one of those patents is taking a simple concept and blow it up to 11000
words, I must really ask myself why I spend my time writing software and not
software patents.

Even though I think this is a nice idea for scaling high-traffic websites and
having them be responsive also when server-side rendering takes relatively
long, this is something that belongs in a technical blog post, not a patent.
Being able to patent those kind of "inventions" really doesn't seem to benefit
anyone.

The impression I get from the (software-)patent system is that its only
current purpose is to have a cold war style arms race so large companies don't
just nuke each other. In the end, all the big players have tons of "nuclear
weapons" in their basements that they cannot get rid of and everybody else has
to be afraid of pissing them off by competing with them.

The longer patents like this one are allowed, the worse the effect on business
and innovation. This really has to stop.

------
narad
I am completely flummoxed by this patent.

1) Setting cookies is a browser feature. How a social networking site, which
was not involved in developing a browser can patent this? 2) How can setting a
cookie be termed as an invention?

~~~
ShellfishMeme
From what I understand, this is not about cookies. It's about cookies storing
information about pending server-side background tasks so the cached parts of
a website can be sent out immediately and the slower server-side tasks can
send over the results later without that resulting in a delayed response. If
your slowest task takes 500ms, you simply spawn a worker who takes care of the
task, immediately send out all things that are in the cache and then have your
website render in <100ms. At 500ms, the rest will be filled in. It also seems
to include a mechanism to figure out what resources are the most cacheable
ones from the usage patterns of the clients.

It's still a joke, but it's more than just setting cookies.

------
VSerge
Totally preposterous. If this doesn't fail the obviousness test for the uspto,
I don't know what does.

~~~
Natsu
> If this doesn't fail the obviousness test for the uspto, I don't know what
> does.

We're talking about the same USPTO that issued this patent:

<http://www.google.com/patents/US6360693>

It only took four years for the USPTO to figure out that there were already
other patents like that:

<http://www.google.com/patents/US4557219>

<http://www.google.com/patents/US428220>

------
adaml_623
The title of the patent: "Setting cookies in conjunction with phased delivery
of structured documents" implies that this only refers to a methodology used
to set cookies in response to user input.

I'm unsure whether Facebook actually use this on their user privacy page. It
would seem insecure to store permissions in cookies.

The rest of the document is corrupted or not written in English so I can't be
sure of the details.

------
robryan
Interesting they bother here, this would surely be invalidated in a trial.

------
naich
Is it just me or is the abstract little more than gibberish?

------
Mordor
Software patents - a bit like patenting a way of making art or a way of
speaking. Silliest idea ever.

------
mikeratcliffe
No way it would stand up at trial, way too obvious.

------
RoryH
This is crazy!

