US10262281B1 - Method and system for centralized order status tracking in a decentralized ordering system - Google Patents
patents.google.com
A decentralized ordering system allows a customer to track order status from a centralized order status system by providing a single, easily remembered identifier (such as a telephone number) without having to log in and without having to specify which local system is handling the customer's order. The central system communicates with each local system to obtain order status information. The central communication function handles all login and authentication requirements on the local systems, if necessary, and reformats the order status data, if necessary, to a common format for storage at the central location. The system also may notify the customer, via telephone, text message, instant message or electronic mail, whenever the order status changes or when the order status changes to a predetermined condition (such as “out for delivery”).

I know about software patents but what’s the point when somebody can achieve the exact same functionality from the user’s perspective using totally different code. Just seems like a waste on a patent lawyer.

    • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
      11·
      7 months ago

      I think the original intention was to motivate people to create new technologies. If you spent your life savings designing and prototyping a new product in your shed you don’t want a giant company being able to go “cool, thanks I’ll make them myself and run you out of business”.

      The whole point is that you’ll invest into it because you’ll be able to profit off it afterwards

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
      10·
      7 months ago

      Isn’t that the point, though. Allow someone to profit from it rather than make it free to use. If there is another way to do it, that is not patented but free, they will use that, even if the code is objectively worse. See media codecs for example at the moment.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
    21·
    7 months ago

    It’s all marketing. You likely only know that Dominos had the system patented because it slaps a big patent number right on the tracker. The fact that you’re discussing it is essentially free advertising and increases brand awareness. So, this post suggests that the investment in patent lawyers was likely worthwhile for the company.

    Largely, consumers seem to derive the below listed perceptions when they recognize that a product is protected by a patent:

    1. When a message about a product being protected by a patent is conveyed, the company as a whole is perceived to be innovative
    1. The patented product is perceived to be superior
    1. The patented product is perceived to be unique, as no one else can copy the patented product

    from https://www.invntree.com/blogs/using-patents-marketing-tool-good-bad-and-ugly

    (this is not a defense of any of these practices; simply indicating what is going on here)

  • Coskii
    3·
    7 months ago

    I had seen it noted on the tracker itself… but it also doesn’t seem very unique or useful overall.

    • Donut@leminal.spaceEnglish
      3·
      7 months ago

      It’s not useful, as it doesn’t always reflect reality so it’s just a bunch of loading bars to manage customer expectation. Ask the domino’s subreddit

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      2·
      7 months ago

      Oh it’s definitely useful.

      The biggest benefit to all that tracking is they use all that data to optimise the delivery process which ultimately means shorter delivery times and lower prices. Those five dollar pizzas are partly thanks to cheap ingredients and low pay, but some of it is also efficient production and delivery.

  • Deebster@programming.dev
    3·
    7 months ago

    This seems like a pretty standard solution for this kind of thing and I don’t believe it would have been patentable - there’s no breakthroughs here, even for 2007.