Microsoft's 'Naughty or Nice' Patent Application 125
theodp writes "Those of you worried about Microsoft's stance on network neutrality won't find much comfort in the software giant's just-published patent application for systems and methods to facilitate self regulation of social networks through trading and gift exchange, which classify users as good or bad and call for network bandwidth to be reduced for those deemed 'less desirable.'"
limitation (Score:3, Interesting)
Net neutrality ONlY for natural monopolies (Score:5, Interesting)
In most other situations, market/social forces will usually make the right result come out.
Took a while... (Score:5, Interesting)
While you can look at it one way and say this is just a logical extension of rewarding 'good' users, the fact that the system can be used to punish 'bad' users and explains nothing about how this definition of 'good' and 'bad' will be determined makes me more concerned for the people using such a service.
I bloody well wouldn't.
Will it work on Linux/Mac? (Score:2, Interesting)
But MS probably have insulated themselves against it anyway...
Slashdot infringes (Score:5, Interesting)
"1. A system that facilitates self-regulation of a social network comprising: a network monitoring component that watches user behavior on the social network; and an asset allocation component that allocates or re-allocates one or more assets among one or more network users based at least in part on whether the user behavior is desirable."
As I read that, the Slashdot moderation system infringes. The "network monitoring component" is the editors and the moderators. They "watch user behavior on the social network". The "asset allocation component" is the karma, which affects how broadly users' messages get seen. Lastly, "based
Re:Confused? (Score:4, Interesting)
I can't see anything in the article saying the network owner will start reducing your bandwidth for YouTube if you were a "bad" user on Microsoft Service X in this patent. You'd only be affected if using Microsoft Service X by Microsoft themselves. Like another way of punishing users than downmodding on Slashdot, but perhaps better applied to high bandwidth media content. Shouldn't Microsoft has the right to dedicate their server resources like they want?
My problem is mostly about companies paying actual network owners to get improved quality of service which could affect users in totally different ways than this.
AC (Score:5, Interesting)
For that matter does this mean my karma might buy me more bandwidth?
Re:Prior Art (Score:5, Interesting)
There's so many prior art examples of this it's just silly.
Re:Slashdot infringes (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Confused? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Slashdot infringes (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Slashdot infringes (Score:2, Interesting)
Uhh - if something exists before the patent, it's called "prior art", not infringement.
Surely that depends on how much cash you have for lawyers?
XBox live? (Score:2, Interesting)
only if you're in econ 101 (Score:3, Interesting)
there's a reason why phrases such as asymmetric information and channel management exist. and why poor people pay more for the same services as rich people. it's called marketing, appropriately enough.
weeeee. market forces!! they created the current patent system, moron, along with pro-business new jersey laws, and self-regulation schemes. not to mention redlining, and zipcode based insurance, and new products paying for space at grocery stores, and mail-in-rebates, and manufactured 'minutes' plans, and all sorts of other interesting little quirks and inefficiencies that occur when you don't have anywhere near perfect competition. Companies know and understand this and that, even in cases where the market will eventually 'deal' with problems, improvements in the market can be delayed again and again by managing the product and policies appropriately.
Re:Prior Art (Score:2, Interesting)