Mobile Content Patents Promise Customization

Written by Evan Schuman
September 6th, 2006

Plenty of options is typically seen as a good thing, unless the screen involved is the size of a cellphone monitor. But which options are displayed and which are hidden?

A Santa Clara, CA, cellphone software firm has been awarded a patent on its method of allowing the cellphone itself to make that selection based on the buying pattern of the consumer.

July Systems, which announced the patent today, argued that the system’s support of realtime personalization is “key to overcoming screen size and other limitations” to help “the mass adoption of mobile video, games, music and other services.”

Gigi Wang, July’s senior VP of marketing and alliances, offered herself as an example of how the system works. She said that she was using a games demo site, where visitor can play any games they want for free, but only for a limited number of times. After that, they are given the option to either purchase the game or buy single-use capabilities.

Wang said she typically purchased the single-use options and, relatively quickly, the cellphone-based program stopped offering her the purchase option, having concluded that, according to Wang, the SVP was too cheap. Instead, it started using that screen space to describe similar games that she could rent.

The program doesn’t use cookies, she said, but simply forces users to log in and then tracks all activity on their servers. The system also has the ability to integrate a client’s database into July’s database so that the system would recognize those customers’ preferences much more quickly.

An ever-present challenge for Web sites has been the huge number of variables that impacts how people view the same site, including their operating system, browser, browser version, firewalls, popup blockers, spyware, anti-virus programs, screen size, screen settings, multimedia applications and settings, amount of RAM and speed of connection.

Programming for mobile content has every one of those same challenges, but also adds the type of wireless connection, which can have a huge impact on how content is viewed.

“We understand the complexity of the mobile world,” Wang said, adding that her company’s patents speak to that understanding.


One Comment | Read Mobile Content Patents Promise Customization

  1. matt Says:

    Uggh… when will the patent office ever learn? Software that simply changes its behavior based on past experience is not new or novel in any way.

    I’m really starting to agree with those who want to just completely ban all software patents. If the patent office can’t tell what is new from what is just the same old stuff then they are doing more harm than good.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.