SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COLLECTING BONAFIDE REVIEWS OF RATABLE OBJECTS

• US 20090210444A1
• Filed: 10/17/2008
• Published: 08/20/2009
• Est. Priority Date: 10/17/2007
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: RatePoint, Inc.
• Original Assignee: RatePoint, Inc.
• Inventors: CHEN, Kefeng, ROWAN, Michael J., BAILEY, Christopher T.M., CREIGHTON, Neal Lewis JR.
• Application Number:
  US12/253,493
• Publication Number:
  US 20090210444A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising

Abstract

A method for providing a computer-based service to automatically evaluate and determine authenticity of a rating. The computer system receives (a) input with rating information that includes a rating and identification data for a specified ratable object and (b) rater profile information including identification information and usage information associated with a user of the computer based service. At least one evaluation step is performed to determine a risk level associated with the rating information, the rater profile information, and an associated time frame. Based on the risk level, an evaluation outcome message is communicated to the user. The evaluation outcome message may include an acceptance message, an information request message, and a rejection message. With the acceptance message, the service accepts the rating for storage in a rating information database. With the information request message, the service implements a verification process. With the rejection message, the service rejects the rating.

Claims

1. A method, performed on a computer system, providing a computer-based service to automatically evaluate and determine authenticity of a rating, the method comprising:

(a) receiving input at the computer system with rating information, the rating information including a rating for a specified ratable object and identification data for the ratable object;

(b) receiving input at the computer system with rater profile information, the rater profile information including at least one of identification information and usage information associated with an active user of the computer based service;

(c) performing at least one evaluation step, the at least one evaluation step evaluating the received input at the computer system, wherein evaluating comprises determining a risk level associated with the rating information, the rater profile information, and a time frame associated with receiving input;

(d) determining, based on the risk level, an evaluation outcome message;

(e) communicating to the active user the evaluation outcome message, the evaluation outcome message including at least one of an acceptance message, an information request message, and a rejection message;

wherein upon communication of the acceptance message, the computer-based service accepts the rating for the specified ratable object for storage in a rating information database, wherein upon communication of the information request message, the computer-based service implements a verification process, and wherein upon communication of the rejection message, the computer-based service rejects the rating for the specified ratable object for storage in the rating information database.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the ratable object comprises one of a business, a person, a product, a URI, a website, web page content, a virtual object, a virtual product, or a virtual service.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein receiving input at the computer system comprises receiving electronic information by way of one of a URI, an Internet capable application, Javascript, SMS texting, Telephone, Flash object, and application program interface (API).

4. The method of claim 1 wherein communicating to the active user an evaluation outcome message includes transmitting electronic information by way of one of a URI, an Internet capable application, Javascript, SMS texting, Telephone, Flash object, and application program interface (API).

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the evaluation step comprises classifying the rating as one of positive and negative.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein the evaluation step comprises evaluating the rater profile information to determine whether the active user is an ad hoc user.

7. The method of claim 1 wherein the evaluation step comprises evaluating the rater profile information to determine whether the active user is a recruited user.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein the evaluation step comprises evaluating usage information to determine a usage history via at least one of tracking an IP address, applying a cookie and requesting usage information from the active user.

9. The method of claim 1 wherein evaluating a time frame associated with receiving input comprises determining whether an upper or lower time limit for receiving input at the computer system with rating information is exceeded.

10. The method of claim 1 wherein evaluating the rating information comprises determining whether an upper or lower text limit for rating information is exceeded.

11. The method of claim 1 wherein determining a risk level comprises identifying a combination of rating information, the rater profile information, and time frame associated with receiving input as high risk.

12. The method of claim 1 wherein determining a risk level comprises identifying a combination of rating information, the rater profile information, and time frame associated with receiving input as medium risk.

13. The method of claim 1 wherein determining a risk level comprises identifying a combination of rating information, the rater profile information, and time frame associated with receiving input as low risk.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein the verification process comprises automatically communicating to the active user via at least one of an SMS message, an e-mail message, a telephone call, a facsimile and a postal message, a request for additional information.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein the request for additional information includes one of active user confirmation, additional identification information and additional usage information associated with the active user.

16. The method of claim 1, wherein upon communication of the acceptance message, the method further comprises assigning a transaction identity to the rating information, the transaction identity comprising the risk level, the evaluation outcome message, the rater profile information, and the time frame associated with receiving input.

17. The method of claim 1, wherein upon communication of the rejection message, the method further comprises assigning a transaction identity to the rejected rating information, the transaction identity comprising the risk level, the evaluation outcome message, the rater profile information, and the time frame associated with receiving the input.