A typical search on the World Wide Web, e.g., on a shopping web site, provides results that may be so numerous that a list of the results may require a user to scroll through the list and/or navigate many pages in order to see all of the results. The results are typically viewed by the user to determine whether there are any listings of interest; e.g., items for purchase, user reviews, ratings, coupons, business profile information, products, auction items, etc. The user may be interested only in a single listing in a set of search results. However, some web sites allow a user to select multiple listings in a set of results and compare the listings in order to improve the efficiency and accuracy of the user's decisions, e.g., to purchase a listing. For example, as is known, selection of a plurality of listings in what may be referred to as a “compare operation” may cause information about the listing to be displayed in a chart or table in a web page.
Unfortunately, known compare operations suffer from a number of shortcomings. For example, a user may be provided a list of web search results having on the order of one hundred (100) listings that match a search query. The user must scroll through the list of listings to determine which listings to view in greater detail and/or compare to other listings. When the user decides that a listing is worth comparing to other listings, present systems and methods require that the user click a standard check box or the like in a graphical user interface (GUI) indicating that the user wants the listing to be compared to other listings. However, the selection of the checkbox (or similar input mechanism) does not initiate the compare operation itself.
Once the user has selected, i.e., checked, the desired checkboxes or the like, present web pages require that the user then visually search the web page for compare links at the top and/or the bottom of a web page providing search results. A compare link, when selected, initiates a compare operation for the selected results. However, depending upon the number of the results, the user may disadvantageously and inefficiently have to scroll an unwieldy distance through the web page in order to find the compare links because the present systems and methods typically locate such links at the beginning or end of the results list. The additional scrolling and searching required to locate a compare link is time consuming, annoying, and may in fact prevent the user from searching, comparing, and purchasing.
Thus, present systems and methods for comparing listings in search results are cumbersome and inflexible. In a large set of results, once a user has selected all of the listings he or she wishes to compare to one another, the user must wade through the results until a compare link is found. This is particularly difficult if the listings chosen for comparison are located near the middle of a page of results. When scrolling long distances, the user may become tired or disoriented, thus making the review of search results inefficient and impractical. Such disadvantages may, for example, dissuade a shopper from using a compare feature in a shopping web site because of the difficulty of making selections, and may prevent selection of search results including purchases based on search results.
According to some previous attempts to solve the foregoing problems a new input mechanism, e.g. a button, is dynamically created next to a listing (on the far right hand side) when it is selected for comparison. This button may be used to initiate a compare operation. However, a serious and common problem in creating new buttons is that when the new buttons appear outside the area that the user is perusing (that is, the selection area), or drawn on a portion of the page not typically used for listing search results, the user may not see the new buttons at all, or the new buttons may be confusing. Such a button is generally not fully drawn on the visible portion of the page depending upon the width of a browser window. Therefore, a user must scroll the page to the right in order to see such new buttons. Moreover, such scrolling occurs only if the user realizes that the newly added buttons exist and are to be used to compare listings. Because the buttons appear physically farther away from the selection area, the user may never see the appearance of the buttons. Moreover, if the button is placed over the listing description, which is often the case due to the limited amount of space available, the layout may be compromised by reducing the amount of information presented about each product that the user is reading to base the compare decision upon. Thus, an additional button that takes away descriptive information creates a situation in which the user is less informed in making a decision based on the comparison of listings in the search results.
New buttons may further distract a user because the user must determine what actions the buttons perform and why the buttons appeared in the first place. Even by looking at and studying new buttons, the user may not know what functions the buttons may activate. This may lead the user to ignore new buttons. The end result of such new buttons is the confusion and frustration of the user.
Accordingly, there is a need for a solution that minimizes the amount of scrolling required by a user wishing to compare products. Such a solution would preferably afford the initiation of a comparison of selected listings from within a set of results. Such a solution would also preferably permit a comparison to be initiated near each selected listing or group of listings. Further, it would be a preferable feature that an input mechanism minimize user of space while still being easily manipulated. Additionally, it would be preferable that the solution appear in the same general location as the selection area so that the user's eyes are already fixed on the location. It would also be desirable that the comparison label be available immediately after any listing is selected. Preferably, the solution would allow for a variety of displayed text or graphics depending on the status of an associated form input with the enablement of an action.
The features and inventive aspects will become apparent upon reading the following detailed description, claims, and drawings, of which the following is a brief description:
Referring now to the drawings, illustrative embodiments are shown in detail. Although the drawings represent certain embodiments, the drawings are not necessarily to scale and certain features may be exaggerated to better illustrate and explain an innovative aspect of an embodiment. Further, the embodiments described herein are not intended to be exhaustive or otherwise limiting to the precise form and configuration shown in the drawings and disclosed herein.
Referring to
Web server 12 may include any web server hardware and/or software such as will be known to those skilled in the art. In one embodiment web server 12 includes a computer using the Linux operating system, but those skilled in the art will recognize that any of a number of known operating systems, e.g., Windows®, Unix, etc., could be used in the context of system 10.
Data store 14 may be a relational database, a file system, or any other electronic data storage system known to those skilled in the art. In one embodiment, data store 14 includes a relational database software program that executes on a server computer using the Linux operating system. For example, in one embodiment, the relational database software program is MySQL, although those skilled in the art will recognize that data store 14 could include a wide variety of relational database programs. Further, those skilled in the art will recognize that data store 14 could include multiple software programs and/or multiple computers, and further that data store 14 could be implemented using any one of a number of known computer operating systems. Moreover, some embodiments include more than one data store 14.
Server 12, data store 14, and clients 18 generally communicate over network 16. Network 16 may be a private and/or public data network such as the Internet, a telecommunications wireless network, a local area network, a wide-area network, or any other type of network such as is known to those skilled in the art. Moreover, network 16 may be a combination of these or other different types of networks. Further, network 16 may be wireless, wired, or some combination of wired and wireless. System 10 is not restricted to a particular type of network 16. Moreover, system 10 is particularly advantageous in that, in embodiments in which network 16 is the Internet, system 10 is not restricted to a particular wireless network or standard. Any client 18 that can access the Internet can access system 10.
Generally speaking, client 18 enables users to access information stored in data store 14. In some embodiments, client 18 may access data computed from data stored in client 18 or some other component of system 10 instead of or in addition to accessing data stored in data store 14. For example, as will be understood by those skilled in the art, data store 14 could include a relational database capable of executing stored procedures that are called by a program accessible from client 18. Also, client 18 could contain a cache of data likely to be requested by a user. Client 18 may be any computing device capable of displaying a listing and capable of connection to a network, including a desktop computer, laptop computer, notebook computer, tablet computer, handheld computer, personal digital assistant, cellular telephone, etc. Functionality provided by client 18 in various embodiments is described further below. Most embodiments include a plurality of clients 18.
Accordingly, those skilled in the art will recognize that the various processes described herein with reference to client 18 and server 12, including data store 14, may be implemented at least in part as instructions executable by one or more computers. In general, a processor (e.g., a microprocessor) receives instructions, e.g., from a memory or other computer-readable medium, and executes those instructions, thereby performing one or more processes, including one or more of the processes described herein. Such instructions may be stored and transmitted using a variety of known computer-readable media.
A computer-readable medium includes any medium that participates in providing data (e.g., instructions) which may be read by a computer. Such a medium may take many forms, including, but not limited to, non-volatile media, volatile media, and transmission media. Non-volatile media include, for example, optical or magnetic disks and other persistent memory. Volatile media include dynamic random access memory (DRAM), which typically constitutes a main memory. Transmission media include coaxial cables, copper wire and fiber optics, including the wires that comprise a system bus coupled to the processor. Transmission media may include or convey acoustic waves, light waves and electromagnetic emissions, such as those generated during radio frequency (RF) and infrared (IR) data communications. Common forms of computer-readable media include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, any other magnetic medium, a CD-ROM, DVD, any other optical medium, punch cards, paper tape, any other physical medium with patterns of holes, a RAM, a PROM, an EPROM, a FLASH-EEPROM, any other memory chip or cartridge, a carrier wave as described hereinafter, or any other medium from which a computer can read.
Referring now to
A user typically browses list 20 and views brief descriptions 26, each associated with listings 22, in order to decide whether or not to select listing 22 using form input 28. Each listing 22 is preferably associated with form input 28 and a dynamic label 30. However, it is foreseeable that some listings 22 may be placed in list 20 yet may not be associated with form input 28, dynamic label 30, or either, for various reasons, e.g., such as the unavailability of a listing or the expiration of descriptive content.
List 20 is assembled onto a web page 21 illustrated in
In one embodiment, form input 28 is embodied as a check box, known to those skilled in the art. Form input 28 allows a user to select various listings 22 by clicking the box in order to check the box using an input device such as a mouse, trackball, touch pad, pointer, etc. Thus, when form input 28 is checked a selection is made of the associated selected listing 22. Form input 28 allows a user to scroll through list 20 and determine which listings 22 are to be grouped together for a future action, e.g., comparison. Form input 28 may also be unchecked if a user decides to exclude the associated listing 22 from the future action.
Further, each check box may include an invisible link that provides for a change in dynamic label 30. The invisible link is a hidden HTML form input known to those skilled in the art. Additionally, each check box may activate a JavaScript function or the like for recording selection information concerning product information fields as well as links (explained below with regard to the buttons in
Product information fields may include the product name, manufacturer, model, color, style, a unique identifier string, or similar characteristic information related to the product. Selection information is generally a repository of collected information that identifies to client 18, and/or server 12, which listings 22 have been selected and other attributes that are necessary or desired related to the selections. The selection information is discussed in detail below regarding
In some embodiments an invisible link associated with form input 28, discussed above, triggers execution of a script by client 18 that may perform certain functions. These functions may include selecting or deselecting form input 28, as is known in the art, and/or counting the number of form inputs 28 that are selected on a page. The counting function may be used at least to determine whether or not to change the state of the associated dynamic label 30 as is explained in detail below with respect to
Dynamic label 30 includes a label text 32 and the possibility for an action (not shown) to be taken when dynamic label 30 is clicked by a user. Label text 32 may dynamically change, based on events related to dynamic label 30, or listing 22, or both, using JavaScript or other programming techniques known to those skilled in the art. Server 12 provides client 18 with web page 21 that includes label texts 32, 34 in both forms. The change from label text 32 to label text 34 is typically performed on client 18 using a script that is also provided by server 12 with web page 21. The change to dynamic label 30 may also be performed on the server 12. However, some disadvantages of changing or updating dynamic label 30 on the server 12 may include an increased load on server 12 for processing the information as well as increased traffic on network 16. Some advantages to server 12 processing may be near real-time tracking of the selection of listings 22.
Because dynamic label 30 is associated with listing 22, any change to the status of listing 22 or associated form input 28 may trigger a change in dynamic label 30. For example, as shown in
Dynamic label 30 also provides an action when clicked. The action that is discussed here is intended to encompass the action taken when a user clicks dynamic label 30. For example, when a user clicks dynamic label 30, in some embodiments a link is sent to server 12 that informs server 12 that a comparison operation is to be performed on the selected listings 22. Server 12 in turn prepares and transmits a new page to client 18 that includes the selected listings 22 in a comparison format. However, the action is not limited to a comparison function.
The action is dependent upon the state of dynamic label 30 whose state is in turn dependent upon the associated form input 28, label text 32, and the status of listing 22. That is to say, dynamic label 30 may change state, depending on the rules defined for the particular embodiment, when the associated form input 28 changes state, e.g., form input 28 is checked. In one embodiment, the action is null when form input 28 is unselected (unchecked). That is to say, there is no action taken. Thus, when dynamic label 30 is clicked, no action is taken on any of listings 22 that are selected. On the other hand, when form input 28 is selected, e.g., checked, and another listing 22 is also selected, then the action taken is to compare every listing 22 having form input 28 selected.
In addition to the embodiments listed in
Referring now to
Second state 524, entered by selection of form input 28 and state transition 526, displays second label text 34 and may take a second action when clicked. Second state 524 is similar to first state 522 in that actions may be taken and label texts 32, 34 may be displayed. Key differences may be found in the actions and label texts 32, 34 that are assigned to each of first state 522 and second state 524. In this embodiment, second label text 34 announces to a user that dynamic label 30 is used to “compare products,” as shown in
Alternatively, dynamic label 30 may change based on other information such as the availability of listing 22 and/or that the maximum number of listings allowed for comparison has been reached, i.e., information other than simply the state of form input 28. Thus, any number of actions could be taken for any combination of inputs. For example, a listing 22 that is selected may become unavailable while a user is selecting other listings 22; e.g., out of stock. In this case, the second action taken by server 12 may be to provide a new page with dynamic label 30 disabled for the particular listing 22. Alternatively, dynamic label 30 may be relabeled “out of stock,” or “backordered.” In these cases, the second action performed by server 12 is very different from the compare function that a user requested. However, a user may decide to compare the remaining listings by clicking the dynamic label 30 associated with one of the remaining listings. Additionally, dynamic label 30 may be embodied as text, boxed text, or a graphic, or a combination of embodiments. Further, the message provided by label text 34 may be updated or changed with or without notice to the user. For example, label text 34 may include information concerning the number of selections that have been made—in the case of the exemplary comparison feature, label text 34 may indicate the number of listings that have currently been selected for comparison (“Click to compare—3 items selected”)—which may be updated for all label text 34 on page 21 upon further selection/deselection of listings 22 by the user. Further, label text 34 may be embodied as an icon or symbol.
Additionally, form input 28 may be automatically deselected in an embodiment, for example, when a compare operation is requested when a listing is, or becomes, out of stock. Alternatively, form input may be sent initially in second state 524, i.e., pre-selected, if the programming of server 12 decides that listing 22 should be showcased, e.g., a new item or a best seller. In other ways, form input 28 may become selected if a user initiates a “select all” link that may appear on web page 21 (not illustrated). Similarly, form input 28 may become deselected if a user initiates an “unselect all” link that may appear on web page 21 (not illustrated). Further, a process operating on client 18 may only allow a limited number of listings 22 to be selected. Thus, selection of form input 28 may not be allowed by client 18. As a result, form input 28 may become selected or deselected through an action by a user, by server 12, or by client 18 independently of the user.
Referring now to
List 20′ provides a number of items for sale as listings 22, 22′, 22″. This embodiment is to be compared with the embodiment of
Further, when list 20, 20′ spans more than one page, a next link 50, a back link 52, or both, may appear on the page to allow a user to fully traverse list 20 in order to select listings 22 for comparison. When a user traverses list 20′, server 12 may receive and store aggregate selection information based on whether or not form inputs 28 are selected. The selection information is passed to other pages by the next link 50, or back link 52, in order to traverse multiple pages, through server 12. The passing of information may be accomplished in various ways know to those skilled in the art, e.g., through back link 52 and next link 50, a set of hidden values on the page, cookies, or parameters that are passed through a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) string so that the newly rendered page may maintain the selection information from previous pages, etc.
When spanning multiple pages, aggregate information may be collected for the selection information of each listing 22 that has been selected for all pages that a user has viewed. The aggregate information may include a unique identifier for the particular listing 22, and may also include relative information such as an index within the full list 20 or the page number that listing 22 appeared on. The aggregate information may also include the total number of selected listings 22 for all pages 21, and/or the total number of listings 22 selected for the present page 21. Server 12 may use this information to determine the efficacy of the order of listings 22, e.g., that more listings 22 are selected on the first page when a user has looked at four (4) pages indicates that the ordering is appropriate. In general, aggregate information is a collection of identifying characteristics related to list 20, as well as other information related to the user of client 18.
The aggregate information is important for an embodiment that chooses to maintain a store, e.g., a list or compilation, of selected listings 22 and transfer the store from page to page; e.g., a first page to a second or third page, etc. That is to say, the if the user were to check a box on the first page, the identifying information of the checked box (a unique identifier for the particular listing 22) is moved from page to page, either by scripts on client 18 or by transmitting the information to server 12, until the comparison function is invoked. In aggregating the information, efficiencies may be gained by not having to count all of the selected listings 22 each time another listing 22 is selected on another page. As information is aggregated, additional selections may be added to the aggregate by client 18. The information related to the count of selected listings 22 may be updated without having to count each and every listing 22 again that had been previously selected. Thus, client 18 may efficiently maintain the aggregate information and server 12 need not use resources for tracking a particular user's selection information. However, when an action is requested, such as a compare action, server 12 will, of course, use the aggregate information to build a compare page with the selected listings 22.
Typically, a user selects one, a plurality, or none of the products listed on a page and then clicks on next link 50 or back link 52. The selected product identifications as well as the thread identification may then be passed in a URL string, known to those skilled in the art. This accumulated information related to selection of listings 22 is then also sent to server 12 when the compare link is activated. Thus, the compare function can use the aggregate information that is sent in the URL string, by client 18 to server 12, to identify which listings 22 the comparison should be performed upon. Such aggregate information, as discussed above, is preferably stored by client 18 by hidden values on web page 21 or by cookies. However, in one embodiment, server 12 may track all selection information. Alternatively, both client 18 and server 12 may track the aggregate information.
By providing dynamic label 30 advantageously associated with listing 22, embodiments discussed herein reduce the effort required by a user to take an action on a list of listings 22. By providing dynamic label 30 with the ability to change label text 32 and actions, dynamic label 30 advantageously eliminates the need to scroll up or down a page to locate a specific action button, e.g., “compare.” Rather, dynamic label 30, located near the listings 22, when clicked, triggers an action such as “compare” operation by server 12. Thus, when finished selecting listings 22, a user may immediately “click” dynamic label 30 to perform the action announced by label text 32. In this manner, dynamic label 30 affords a comparison action from within the results of a search rather than at the beginning or end of the list. Also, dynamic label 30 advantageously occupies only a small amount of space on a page. For example, in one embodiment a “check box”, e.g., form input 28, is located near the upper left corner of listing 22 and dynamic label 30 is placed below the “check box.” In such a configuration, dynamic label 30 occupies a minimum of space on page 21. (See
Further, because dynamic label 30 updates label text 32 and the click action, the compare action is immediately available after every selection at the location of the selection. Label text 32 advantageously announces to a user what the action will be if dynamic label 30 is clicked. Additionally, when scrolling through list 20, each dynamic label 30 offers a user an opportunity to initiate an action while scrolling through list 20. This provides that, even if a user strays from any of selected listings 22, that a user can initiate an action by scrolling back through list 20 to selected listings 22, 22′, 22″ rather than going to the beginning or end of the listing.
Embodiments disclosed herein facilitate shopping by providing a simple and intuitive compare link at the location of form input 28. Because dynamic label 30 is located next to form input 28, the eyes of a user are already fixed on dynamic label 30 at that location. Thus, there is no chance that a user will not see dynamic label 30 when a change occurs in label text 32. Rather than popping up new buttons in different locations, embodiments of the present invention provide for a changed label at the same location. Confusion of users is avoided because the change to label text 32 is done right before the eyes of a user.
Additionally, because label text 32, 34 changes in place, rather than having a new button placed on web page 21, space on web page 21 is advantageously conserved. For the designers of the web page, or form, the width constraint is no longer tied to the compare button, or top and bottom compare buttons, or both. In any event, dynamic label 30 saves significant space by providing changes to label text 32 associated with an action where these changes may be done “in place.” Thus a new button is not required and the page layout may be further optimized without using space for the compare operation.
To conserve space on web page 21, dynamic label 30 is able to replace first label text 32 in its place with second label text 34. This replacement scheme provides that a minimum of web page 21 space is used when second label text 34 is placed where the former label text 32 existed. However, dynamic label 30 may encounter situations where there is no change to label text 32 after a selection of the associated listing 22; e.g., if the associated listing 22 is the only listing 22 selected when dynamic label 30 is configured to initiate a compare operation, no change in state is needed to enable the compare functionality.
When label text 32 changes to second label text 34, the position of second label text 34 may be calculated in order to appropriately position second label text 34. The positioning may be performed in a number of ways including aligning the center location or left justification at the same position as the first letter of old label text 32. However, for best visual aesthetic, alignment of the center location is preferred. The center location, in an embodiment, may be the geometric center of the label text as is known to those skilled in the art. However, other embodiments may define the center location as the center of a graphic, e.g. a picture, that contains label text 32, 34. Further, the center location may include constraints to avoid placing label text 32, 34 over a portion of web page 21, form input 28, and/or listing 22.
In step 554, a determination is made as to whether a second label text 34 is required (explained in detail with respect to
In step 556, the center location for second label text 34 is determined. The process then proceeds to step 558.
In step 558, display of a second label text 34 is required. When dynamic label 30 changes state, the second label text 34 is to be placed at the same center location as the center location of the first label text 32. In other words, placement of second label text 34 is at the same location as first label text 32, i.e., second label text 34 is provided over the same over the area that first label text 32 occupied. Thus, dynamic label 30 need not be relocated and the changing of label texts 32, 34 occupies no more space on web page 21 than is necessary. Of course, if second label text 34 has significantly more characters than first label text 32, more space may be occupied. However, in such a case, the font size of second label text 34 may be reduced so that approximately the same area is needed for second label text 34 as was used by first label text 32. The process ends following step 558.
In step 504, the status of form input 28 is determined by client 18. In one embodiment, form input 28 is a “check box” that allows a user to select or unselect listing 22 by checking the box (illustrated in detail above with respect to
In step 506 a second label text 34 is displayed for a dynamic label 30. (See
In step 604, dynamic label 30 is prepared to trigger a first action if clicked. As illustrated in
In step 606, the status of form input 28 is determined by client 18. In one embodiment, form input 28 is a “check box” that allows a user to select or unselect listing 22 by checking the box (illustrated in detail above with respect to
In step 608 second label text 34 is displayed for dynamic label 30. (See
In step 610 dynamic label 30 is associated with listing 22′ and a second action is taken if clicked (explained in detail above with respect to
In step 704 first label text 32 is displayed for dynamic label 30. (See
In step 706, the action for dynamic label 30 while displaying first label text 32 is determined. If dynamic label 30 is clicked, then control proceeds to step 718 where a first action is taken. If dynamic label 30 is not clicked, then no action is taken and control proceeds to step 708. Alternatively, dynamic label 30 may not have an action associated with first label text 32 in which case the comparison will not transfer control to step 718 even if dynamic label 30 is clicked. In the case of such a null action, control bypasses step 706 and control falls through to step 708.
In step 708, the status of form input 28 is determined by client 18. In one embodiment, form input 28 is a “check box” that allows a user to select or unselect listing 22 by checking the box (illustrated in detail above with respect to
In step 710, second label text 34 is displayed for dynamic label 30. (See
In step 712, the action for dynamic label 30 while displaying second label text 34 is determined. If dynamic label 30 is clicked, then control proceeds to step 716 where a second action is taken. If dynamic label 30 is not clicked, then no action is taken and control proceeds to step 714. Alternatively, dynamic label 30 may not have an action associated with second label text 34 in which case the comparison will not transfer control to step 716 even if dynamic label 30 is clicked. In the case of such a null action, control bypasses step 712 and control falls through to step 714.
In step 714, the status of form input 28 is again determined by client 18. If form input 28 is unchecked then control proceeds to step 704. If form input 28 is checked, then control proceeds to step 710.
In step 718, the first action is taken based on a user's “clicking” dynamic label 30 when first label text 32 is displayed. In alternative embodiments, an action may be assigned, such as “view details,” as is illustrated in
In step 716 the second action is taken based on a user's “clicking” dynamic label 30 when second label text 34 is displayed. In alternative embodiments, an action may be assigned, such as “view details,” as is illustrated in
In step 804 the process counts the number of selected form inputs 28. Form inputs 28 are typically check boxes having a value associated with a checked and unchecked state. (See
In step 806, the process determines whether a plurality of form inputs 28 is selected. If more than one form input 28 is selected, then a compare operation may occur. If only a single form input 28 is selected, a compare operation may not occur because, as should be understood, there must be at least two listings 22 in order to perform a comparison. If the number of form inputs 28 selected is greater than one, control proceeds to step 808. If the number of form inputs 28 selected is not greater than one, the process 800 ends following step 806.
In step 808, dynamic label 30 is transitioned to the second state represented by dynamic label 30. In this case, label text 34 is updated and a link activated. For example, when more than one form input 28 is selected, dynamic label 30 may change label text 32, 34 from a first state of “check to compare” to the second state of “compare products.” (See
In addition to the embodiments discussed herein, it is important to note that listings 22 may represent a mixture of comparable items. For example, a user may desire to compare coupons and reviews. Further, a comparison of user reviews and ratings may be desired. Further, dynamic label 30 may provide for the comparison of listings 22 and an aggregation of items outside the current pages. For example, a user may select listings 22 for comparison and use dynamic label 30 to compare the items with a saved aggregation of “favorites” or “wish list” items. Thus, the actions of dynamic label 30 are not limited to the current page or listings 22.
The preceding description has been presented only to illustrate and describe exemplary embodiments of the methods and systems of the claimed invention. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the claimed invention to any precise form disclosed. It will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes may be made and equivalents may be substituted for elements thereof without departing from the scope of the invention. In addition, many modifications may be made to adapt a particular system or method to the teachings herein without departing from the scope of the claimed invention. Further, it is anticipated and intended that future developments will occur in the field of information systems, and that the disclosed systems and methods will be incorporated into such future embodiments. Accordingly, it should be understood that the invention is capable of modification and variation and is limited only by the following claims. Therefore, it is intended that the claims appended hereto not be limited to particular embodiment disclosed herein, but that the invention will include all embodiments falling within the scope of the claims. The invention may be practiced otherwise than is specifically explained and illustrated without departing from its spirit or scope. The scope of the invention is limited solely by the following claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/334,543, filed on Jan. 19, 2006, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. Also, the present application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/060,209, entitled “METHOD FOR EXTRACTION AND SELECTION OF ENHANCED BUSINESS INFORMATION FROM WEBSITES, BUSINESS PROFILES AND ADVERTISING PRODUCTS”, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/060,243, entitled “IMPROVING SEARCH RELEVANCE AND YELLOW PAGE CLASSIFICATION INTEGRATION BY USING BUSINESS PROFILE CONTENT AND VERTICAL INDUSTRY TEMPLATES”, both filed Feb. 17, 2005, and also U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/948,425, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,516,086 entitled “BUSINESS RATING PLACEMENT HEURISTIC”, filed on Sep. 23, 2004, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/680,952, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,050,990, entitled “INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM”, filed on Oct. 8, 2003, and which further claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/505,597, entitled “INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM”, filed Sep. 24, 2003, and also U.S. application Ser. No. 10/800,887, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,822,661,filed Mar. 15, 2004, titled “INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND METHOD UTILIZING A POSITION ADJUSTMENT FACTOR”, and also U.S. application Ser. No. 10/801,156, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,974,878 filed Mar. 15, 2004, titled “INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND METHOD UTILIZING A POSITION ADJUSTMENT FACTOR”, and also U.S. application Ser. No. 10/800,444, filed Mar. 15, 2004, titled “INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND METHOD UTILIZING A POSITION ADJUSTMENT FACTOR”. The contents and teachings of each of these applications are hereby incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4532554 | Skala | Jul 1985 | A |
4546382 | McKenna et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4602279 | Freeman | Jul 1986 | A |
4789235 | Borah et al. | Dec 1988 | A |
4850007 | Marino et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4992940 | Dworkin | Feb 1991 | A |
5144663 | Kudelski | Sep 1992 | A |
5155591 | Wachob | Oct 1992 | A |
5162989 | Matsuda | Nov 1992 | A |
5187735 | Herrero Garcia et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5220501 | Lawlor et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5231494 | Wachob | Jul 1993 | A |
5237157 | Kaplan | Aug 1993 | A |
5267171 | Suzuki | Nov 1993 | A |
5283731 | Lalonde et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5305195 | Murphy | Apr 1994 | A |
5319455 | Hoarty | Jun 1994 | A |
5339239 | Manabe | Aug 1994 | A |
5347632 | Filepp et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5359508 | Rossides | Oct 1994 | A |
5408417 | Wilder | Apr 1995 | A |
5410344 | Graves | Apr 1995 | A |
5446919 | Wilkins | Aug 1995 | A |
5479491 | Herrero Garcia et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5502636 | Clarke | Mar 1996 | A |
5515098 | Carles | May 1996 | A |
5532735 | Blahut et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5636346 | Saxe | Jun 1997 | A |
5659732 | Kirsch | Aug 1997 | A |
5664109 | Johnson et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5704060 | Del Monte | Dec 1997 | A |
5704560 | Wimmer | Jan 1998 | A |
5717923 | Dedrick | Feb 1998 | A |
5724424 | Gifford | Mar 1998 | A |
5724521 | Dedrick | Mar 1998 | A |
5724524 | Hunt et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5727129 | Barrett et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5740549 | Reilly et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5748954 | Mauldin | May 1998 | A |
5752238 | Dedrick | May 1998 | A |
5758257 | Herz et al. | May 1998 | A |
5758328 | Giovannoli | May 1998 | A |
5768521 | Dedrick | Jun 1998 | A |
5774170 | Hite et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774868 | Cragun et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5781632 | Odom | Jul 1998 | A |
5781894 | Petrecca et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5794210 | Goldhaber et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5826241 | Stein et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5832482 | Yu et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835896 | Fisher et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5848397 | Marsh et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5848407 | Ishikawa et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5850433 | Rondeau | Dec 1998 | A |
5850520 | Griebenow et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5852820 | Burrows | Dec 1998 | A |
5855008 | Goldhaber et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5864845 | Voorhees et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864846 | Voorhees et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5903882 | Asay et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905975 | Ausubel | May 1999 | A |
5915243 | Smolen | Jun 1999 | A |
5918014 | Robinson | Jun 1999 | A |
5920854 | Kirsch | Jul 1999 | A |
5920859 | Li | Jul 1999 | A |
5930474 | Dunworth et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933811 | Angles et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5948061 | Merriman | Sep 1999 | A |
5974398 | Hanson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5991735 | Gerace | Nov 1999 | A |
5991770 | Zamora-McKelvy et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6006257 | Slezak | Dec 1999 | A |
6009410 | LeMole et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6023686 | Brown | Feb 2000 | A |
6026369 | Capek | Feb 2000 | A |
6055510 | Henrick et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6058379 | Odom et al. | May 2000 | A |
6078866 | Buck et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6161099 | Harrington et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6189003 | Leal | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6253189 | Feezell et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6269361 | Davis et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6324519 | Eldering | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6360222 | Quinn | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6418432 | Cohen et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6418433 | Chakrabarti et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6463430 | Brady et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484165 | Beall et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6496843 | Getchius et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6523021 | Monberg et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6560620 | Ching | May 2003 | B1 |
6564208 | Littlefield et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6567918 | Flynn et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6665676 | Twig et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6714934 | Fordham | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6714939 | Saldanha et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6785671 | Bailey et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785688 | Abajian et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6787706 | Hirakawa | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6801906 | Bates et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6826559 | Ponte | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6842906 | Bowman-Amuah | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6868525 | Szabo | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6907574 | Xu et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6973448 | Monberg et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7031961 | Pitkow et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7047242 | Ponte | May 2006 | B1 |
7080064 | Sundaresan | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7089237 | Turnbull et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7110993 | Soulanille et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7152064 | Bourdoncle et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7206778 | Bode et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7225234 | Naqvi | May 2007 | B2 |
7231358 | Singh et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7234107 | Aoki et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7272597 | Chowdhury et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7272637 | Himmelstein | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7295996 | Skinner | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7330852 | Bailey et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7349896 | Chowdhury | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7353192 | Ellis et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7359797 | Dorfman et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7366683 | Altberg et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7373313 | Kahle et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7475346 | Bullock et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7483886 | Cheung et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7509303 | Chen | Mar 2009 | B1 |
7613687 | Nye | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7756630 | Dorfman et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
8572077 | Dorfman et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
20010003177 | Schena et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010044837 | Talib et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010047354 | Davis et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020010015 | Acres | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020026579 | Wiederin et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020026581 | Matsuyama et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020032603 | Yeiser | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020052894 | Bourdoncle et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020069197 | Katayama | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087408 | Burnett | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099700 | Li | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020120506 | Hagen | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020147738 | Reader | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020152222 | Holbrook | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020174089 | Tenorio | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030014428 | Mascarenhas | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030078991 | Harris | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030093482 | Watanabe et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030101126 | Cheung | May 2003 | A1 |
20030135504 | Elvanoglu et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030167250 | Sash | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177076 | Might et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177111 | Egendorf et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030212673 | Kadayam et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030220918 | Roy et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040006478 | Alpdemir et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019601 | Gates | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040023644 | Montemer | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040044571 | Bronnimann et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040051732 | White et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040064436 | Breslin et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040068508 | Sihvo et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078224 | Schramm-Apple et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040107187 | Asobayire et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040111432 | Adams et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040143570 | Klock et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040143600 | Musgrove et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148155 | Vogel | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148637 | Sterkin et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040167845 | Corn et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040186769 | Mangold et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040249713 | Gross | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040254932 | Gupta et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040260604 | Bedingfield | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040267612 | Veach | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050004835 | Roslansky et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050015307 | Simpson et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021596 | Do | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050033641 | Jha et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050050023 | Gosse et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071470 | O'Brien et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050074102 | Altberg et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050102270 | Risvik et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108109 | Wittsche | May 2005 | A1 |
20050119957 | Faber et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050120006 | Nye | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050124266 | Henderson | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050125273 | Simons et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050125307 | Hunt et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138018 | Sakai et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050154718 | Payne et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050160083 | Robinson | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050192946 | Lu et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050203799 | Faber et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050246332 | Wang et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050267798 | Panara | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050278309 | Evans et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050289168 | Green et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060010134 | Davis et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060036504 | Allocca et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060059440 | Pry | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060184417 | Van der Linden et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184453 | Taylor | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060190328 | Singh et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060212545 | Nichols et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060282336 | Huang | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070079282 | Nachnani et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094044 | Stone et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070156677 | Szabo | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20100082590 | Nye | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100153198 | Murphy et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2003-233684 | Aug 2003 | JP |
9717774 | May 1997 | WO |
9828906 | Jul 1998 | WO |
9834189 | Aug 1998 | WO |
9920486 | Apr 1999 | WO |
9948028 | Sep 1999 | WO |
0004190 | Jan 2000 | WO |
0016218 | Mar 2000 | WO |
0041090 | Jul 2000 | WO |
02103576 | Dec 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Qian Li, “Integrated Usability into Use Cases: A methoology for User Interface Design”, Dated 2003. |
“Advertisers Attack Google Over Adwords Enhancement”, “Advertisers Attack Google Over Adwords Enhancement,” New Media Age, p. 3, Oct. 16, 2003. |
“BizRate.com Welcome page”, “BizRate.com Welcome page,” http://web.archive.org/web/20030622131729/http://bizrate.com/, three pages, Copyright 2003. |
“Business.com Homepage”, “Business.com Homepage,” http://web.archive.org/web/20030624095143/http://www.business.com/, Copyright 2003. |
“Citysearch.com Homepage”, “Citysearch.com Homepage,” http://web.archive.org/web/20030617205555/www.cityscarch.com/, Copyright 2003. |
“Corporate Profile for Easy Wireless Inc., dated Jul. 9, 1999”, “Corporate Profile for Easy Wireless Inc., dated Jul. 9, 1999,” Business Wire, two pages, Jul. 16, 1999. |
“Digest (News Briefs)”, “Digest (News Briefs),” New Media Age, one page, Mar. 16, 2000. |
“Dogpile.com Homepage”, “Dogpile.com Homepage,” InfoSpace, Inc., Copyright 2003. |
“eBay Search Results for ‘Baseball Photos,’ 40 Items Found”, “eBay Search Results for ‘Baseball Photos,’ 40 Items Found,” eBay.com, one page, Dec. 19, 2005. |
“eBay Ssearch Results for ‘Baseball Photos,’ 33 Items Found”, “eBay Search Results for ‘Baseball Photos,’ 33 Items Found,” eBay.com, one page, Dec. 19, 2005. |
“Find It in the Online Yellow Pages”, “Find It in the Online Yellow Pages,” BellSouth RealPages.com, one page, Copyright 2004. |
“Findwhat.com Webpage”, “Findwhat.com Webpage,” one page, Copyright 2003. |
“Getting Wired for Sales; Part 2 of 2 Parts”, “Getting Wired for Sales; Part 2 of 2 Parts,” Response TV, vol. 5, No. 7, p. 46+, Mar. 1997. |
“Google Comes Out Ahead”, “Google Comes Out Ahead,” Link—up, vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 1 & 12, Sep./Oct. 2000. |
“Google Does Well Despite Not Taking Paid Placements”, “Google Does Well Despite Not Taking Paid Placements,” Secured Lender, vol. 58, No. 2, p. 80, Mar. 1, 2002. |
“Google Introduces New Pricing for Popular Self-Service Online Advertising Program”, “Google Introduces New Pricing for Popular Self-Service Online Advertising Program,” Business Wire, Google Press Release, http://www.google.com/press/pressrel/select.html, three pages, Feb. 20, 2002. |
“Google Launches Self-Service Advertising Program, Google's AdWords Program Offers Every Business a Fully Automated, Comprehensive and Quick Way to Start an Online Advertising Campaign”, “Google Launches Self-Service Advertising Program, Google's AdWords Program Offers Every Business a Fully Automated, Comprehensive and Quick Way to Start an Online Advertising Campaign,” Business Wire, Google Press Release, five pages, Oct. 23, 2000. |
“Google Search—1,346,966,000 Web Pages Found”, “Google Search—1,346,966,000 Web Pages Found,” one page, retrieved from the Internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“Google Search : ‘goto.com’”, “Google Search: ‘goto.com,” seven pages, Apr. 29, 1998. |
“Guidant Announces FDA Clearance of the RX Herculink 14 Biliary Stent System”, “Guidant Announces FDA Clearance of the RX Herculink 14 Biliary Stent System,” Business Wire, two pages, Sep. 7, 1999. |
“Intasys Corporation Subsidiaries Mamma.com Inc. and Intasys Billing Technologies Comment on Q3 2001 Results Discuss Recent Events”, “Intasys Corporation Subsidiaries Mamma.com Inc. And Intasys Billing Technologies Comment on Q3 2001 Results Discuss Recent Events,” Business Wire, four pages, Oct. 31, 2001. |
“Looksmart.com Webpage”, “Looksmart.com Webpage,” one page, retrieved from the internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“Lycos Adds New Features, Reorganizes Suggested Links”, “Lycos Adds New Features, Reorganizes Suggested Links,” Search Engine Report, http://www.searchenqinewatch.com/sereport/98/01-lycos.html, four pages, Jan. 9, 1998. |
“Lycos Adds Predetermined Listings”, “Lycos Adds Predetermined Listings,” CyberAtlas Research, http://www.searchenginewatch.com/sereport/97/12-lycos.html, four pages, Dec. 4, 1997. |
“Metacrawler.com”, “Metacrawler.com,” InfoSpace, Inc. Copyright 2003. |
“MSN.com Homepage”, “MSN.com Homepage,” http://web.archive.org/web/20031007094508/http://msn.com/, retrieved from the Internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“Northern Light Teams with Search4Science, University of Pennsylvania”, “Northern Light Teams with Search4Science, University of Pennsylvania,” http://www.infotoday.com/it/jul01/news7.htm, Information Today, vol. 18, Issue 7, p. 24, Jul./Aug. 2001. |
“QwestDex.com Webpage”, “QwestDex.com Webpage,” http//web.archive.org/web/20030624012055/http://www.qwestdex.com/, retrieved from the Internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“Search Tools—Hotrate Those Replies”, “Search Tools—Hotrate Those Replies,” Information World Review, one page, Mar. 1, 2000. |
“Shopping.com Webpage”, “Shopping.com Webpage,” DealTime Ltd., retrieved from the internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“SmartPages.com Webpage”, “SmartPages.com Webpage,” SBC Properties, L.P., http://web.archive.org/web/20030622195700/http://www.smartpages.com/, retrieved from the Internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“Superpages.com Webpage”, “Superpages.com Webpage,” http://web.archive.org/web/20020928125448/http://www.superpages.com/, retrieved from the Internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
“The CORE Network Selects PropertyFirst.com as Online Marketing Partner, Technology Platform—With 80 U.S.”, “The CORE Network Selects PropertyFirst.com as Online Marketing Partner, Technology Platform—With 80 U.S. Member Firms, CORE Will Use PropertyFirst Services to Strengthen Connectivity, Productivity, and Online Branding,” Business Wire, Nov. 16, 2000. |
“The Great Search Engine Debate”, “The Great Search Engine Debate,” Marketing Week, four pages, Nov. 29, 2001. |
“Toshiba Expands e-Studio Line”, “Toshiba Expands e-Studio Line,” Office Solutions, vol. 19, No. 2, Feb. 2002. |
“Verizon Information Services Partners With Digital: Convergence to Offer Internet-Enhanced Phone Directories”, “Verizon Information Services Partners with Digital: Convergence to Offer Internet—Enhanced Phone Directories,” Business Wire, http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-66623008.html, four pages, Nov. 6, 2000. |
“WebCrawler.com Webpage”, “WebCrawler.com Webpage,” InfoSpace, Inc., Copyright 2004. |
“Yahoo.com Webpage”, “Yahoo.com Webpage,” Yahoo! Inc., http://archive.bibalex.org/web/20010504195729/www.yahoo.com/, retrieved from the internet on Jan. 8, 2004. |
Barron, “Fundraising for Libraries; 25 Proven Ways to Get More Money for Your Library”, Barron, “Fundraising for Libraries; 25 Proven Ways to Get More Money for Your Library,” Reference & User Services Quarterly, vol. 42, No. 2, p. 411, Winter 2002. |
Calishain, “URL Inclusion Programs: New Revenue Generator for Search Engines”, Calishain “URL Inclusion Programs: New Revenue Generator for Search Engines,” Searcher, vol. 10, No. 8, p. 70, Sep. 2002. |
Chacon, “Pay-per-click Internet Ads Hit with Niche Businesses”, Chacon, “Pay-per-click Internet Ads Hit with Niche Businesses,” The Business Press, Small Business, p. 8, Jul. 28, 2003. |
Courter, “Measure for Measure”, Courter, “Measure for Measure,” Credit Union Management, Jan. 1, 2002. |
Deierlein, “What You See Is What You Get!”, Deierlein, “What You See Is What You Get!,” Fleet Equipment, vol. 24, No. 10, pp. 41-44, Oct. 1998. |
Dilabough, “Case Study—Postoptics Search Marketing”, Dilabough, “Case Study—Postoptics Search Marketing,” New Media Age, one page, Jul. 2, 2003. |
Dzilna, “Publishers Fight Declines in Web Advertising CPMs”, Dzilna, “Publishers Fight Declines in Web Advertising CPMs,” Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, vol. 28, No. 3, p. 70, Mar. 1999. |
Fleishman, “Technology Briefing Internet: Google Adds Ad Option”, Fleishman, “Technology Briefing Internet: Google Ads Ad Options,” New York Times, Late Edition, p. 7, col. 5, Feb. 21, 2002. |
Ghiselli, et al., “A Unified Access to Extract Knowledge from Heterogeneous Web Archives”, Ghiselli, C., et al., “Unified Access to Extract Knowledge from Heterogeneous Web Archives, A,” Online Information Review, vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 299-310, 2001., Aug. 8, 2001. |
Gwin, “BT Claims Patent on Hyperlinks”, Gwin, P., “BT Claims Patent on Hyperlinks,” Europe, No. 398, p. 6, Jul./ Aug. 2000., Jul. 1, 2000. |
Haar, “Service to Let Ad Bids Dictate Search Rankings”, Haar, “Service to Let Ad Bids Dictate Search Rankings,” Inter©ctive Week, vol. 5, Issue 7, p. 9, Feb. 23, 1998., 2/23198. |
Hansell, “Clicks for Sale; Paid Placement Is Catching on in Web Searches”, Hansell, “Clicks for Sale; Paid Placement Is Catching on in Web Searches,” New York Times, Technology Section, p. 1, col. 2, Jun. 4, 2001., Jun. 4, 2001. |
Helen, “CWSApps Listing (with download) for My Deja”, Helen, “CWSApps Listing (with download) for My Deja,” posting on alt.windows98, two pages, Sep. 7, 2002. |
Loh, et al., “Polymerase Chain Reaction with Single-sided Specificity: Analysis of T Cell Receptor Delta Chain”, Loh, et al., “Polymerase Chain Reaction with Single-sided Specificity: Analysis of T Cell Receptor Delta Chain”, Science, vol. 243, No. 888, pp. 217-220, Jan. 13, 1989. |
Kanell, “Personal Technology Bellsouth Putting Yellow Pages Online”, Kanell, “Personal Technology Bellsouth Putting Yellow Pages Online,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Apr. 20, 1997. |
Keane, “RBOCs & Start-ups Battle for Listings”, Keane, “RBOCs & Start-ups Battle for Listings,” Interactive Content, v2, p2 (1), Nov. 1996. |
Kuchinskas, “Attention, Please”, Kuchinskas, “Attention, Pease,” Brandweek, vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 56-60, Jan. 17, 2000. |
Loh, et al., “Polymerase Chain Reaction with Single-sided Specificity: Analysis of T Cell Receptor Delta Chain”, Loh, et al., “Polymerase Chain Reaction with Single-sided Specificity: Analysis of T Cell Receptor Delta Chain,” Science, vol. 243, No. 888, pp. 217-220, Jan. 13, 1989. |
Maddox, “Slicing Up IT Niches; CMP Debuts StoragePipeline.com, Joins a Crowd Pushing Down into Vertical Tech Content Areas”, Maddox, “Slicing Up It Niches; CMP Debuts StoragePipeline.com, Joins a Crowd Pushing Down into Vertical Tech Content Areas,” BtoB, vol. 88, No. 6, p. 20, Jun. 9, 2003. |
Mahanta, et al., “BT Dotcom”, Mahanta, et al., “BT Dotcom,” Business Today India, p. 72, Apr. 7, 2001. |
Mardesh, “Search Engine Charges Hit Sites”, Mardesh, “Search Engine Charges Hit Sites,” San Jose Mercury News, Feb. 21, 1998. |
McKellar, “The New Business Intelligence”, McKellar, “The New Business Intelligence,” InformationToday, Jan. 2003. |
McKenna, “New Search Engines Go to Charges for Hits”, McKenna, “New Search Engines Go to Charges for Hits,” Tech InfoBase, Feb. 23, 1998. |
Notess, “Internet Search Engine Update”, Notess, “Internet Search Engine Update,” Online, vol. 26, No. 2, p. 18, Mar./Apr. 2002. |
Ojala, “Google Views the Present, Future”, Ojala, “Google Views the Present, Future,” Information Today, vol. 20, No. 1, p. 1, 48+, Jan. 2003. |
O'Leary, “Business.com: Biggest Business Directory”, O'Leary, “Business.com: Biggest Business Directory,” Link—up, vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 9-10, Jul./Aug. 2002. |
Ostrom, “New Web Portal has Text-only Ads Myway Seeks to Lure Visitors from Bolder Sites Such as Yahoo”, Ostrom, “New Web Portal has Text-only Ads Myway Seeks to Lure Visitors from Bolder Sites Such as Yahoo,” San Jose Mercury News, Business Section, p. C1, Oct. 29, 2002. |
Pelline, “New Search Engine Goes Commercial”, Pelline, “New Search Engine Goes Commercial,” CNET News.com, http://news.cnet.com/news/0,10000,0-1005-200-326672,00.html, two pages, Feb. 18, 1998. |
Pontin, “Gross Idea”, Pontin, “Gross Idea,” Red Herring Magazine, http://www.herring.com/story—redirectasp? layout=story—generic&doc-id=RH640016664&ch . . . , Aug. 6, 2001. |
Rajghatta, “US Voices Its Concern Over Violence in Gujarat”, Rajghatta, “US Voices Its Concern Over Violence in Gujarat,” Times of India, Apr. 17, 2002. |
Rao, “From Unstructured Data to Actionable Intelligence”, Rao, “From Unstructured Data to Actionable Intelligence,” IT Pro, pp. 29-35, Nov./Dec. 2003. |
Rich, “New Search Engine Allows Sites to Pay Their Way to Top”, Rich, “New Search Engine Allows Sites to Pay Their Way to Top,” Adweek, p. 26, Feb. 23, 1998. |
Riedman, “Search Engine Startup to Auction Listings”, Riedman, “Search Engine Startup to Auction Listings,” Advertising Age, Feb. 23, 1998. |
Schut, “AutoFact '91: News in CAD/CAM, CIM & Rapid Prototyping”, Schut, “AutoFact '91: News in CAD/CAM, CIM & Rapid Prototyping,” Plastics Technology, vol. 38, No. 1, p. 21, Jan. 1992. |
Sherman, “Google Introduces Web Directory Using Netscape's Open Directory Project Data”, Sherman, “Google Introduces Web Directory Using Netscape's Open Directory Project Data,” Information Today, vol. 17, No. 5, p. 14, Mar. 27, 2000. |
Swartz, “Browser Only Lists Paying Web Sites”, Swartz, “Browser Only Lists Paying Web Sites,” San Francisco Chronical, Febraury 21, 1998. |
Tedeschi, “To Attract More Advertising From Small Businesses, Search Engines Contemplate Replacing a Click with a Ring”, Tedeschi, “To Attract More Advertising From Small Businesses, Tedeschi, To Attract More Advertising From Small Businesses, Search Engines Contemplate Replacing a Click with a Ring,” The New York Times, Jun. 7, 2004. |
Tomaiuolo, et al., “Maximizing Relevant Retrieval”, Tomaiuolo, et al., “Maximizing Relevant Retrieval,” ProQuest Info & Learning, pp. 57-60, Nov./Dec. 1998. |
Townsend, et al., “Recasting HRIS as an Information Resource”, Townsend, A.M., et al., “Recasting HRIS as an Information Resource,” HRMagazine, vol. 41, No. 2, p. 91, Feb. 1996., Jan. 1, 1996. |
Wagstaff, “Dreamweaver 2 Satisfies Design, Management”, Wagstaff, S., “Dreamweaver 2 Satisfies Design, Management,” eMediaweekly, 26(1), Jan. 4, 1999. |
Warner, “Pile and Co. to Offer Online Search Service”, Warner, “Pile and Co. to Offer Online Search Service,” Adweek (Eastern Ed.), vol. 40, No. 3, p. 5, Jan. 18, 1999. |
Webb, “Search Engine Resurgence”, Webb, “Search Engine Resurgence,” WashingtonPost.com, Feb. 19, 2003. |
Weidlich, “Search Engine Marketing Revving Up”, Weidlich, “Search Engine Marketing Revving Up,” Catalog Age, vol. 9, No. 12, p. S3, S13+, Nov. 2002. |
Woods, “Internet Update”, Woods, “Internet Update,” Newsbytes, one page, Jan. 17, 2002. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120022979 A1 | Jan 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11334543 | Jan 2006 | US |
Child | 13251325 | US |