Content deleted Content added
→Patent lawsuit: formatted dismissal of lawsuit ref |
m the work's name is "The New York Times" using AWB |
||
Line 7:
===Business card model===
Cheek'd offered two user plans, paid and free. For $25, subscribers got a set of 50 [[business cards]] that could be given out once someone cought their eye.<ref name=trends>{{cite news |author= |coauthors= |title=Latest dating trends include Web-based calling cards and GPS-powered apps|url=http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/latest-dating-trends-include-web-based-calling-cards-gps-powered-apps-article-1.202481 |work=[[New York Daily News]] |date=July 23, 2010 |accessdate=2010-08-15 | first=Paulina | last=Reso}}</ref> Each card had a phrase, an online code, and a URL to the subscriber's account at the website.<ref name=trends/><ref name=architect>{{cite news |title=The New Dating Tools: A Card and a Wink |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/fashion/22date.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=July 21, 2010 |accessdate=2010-07-23 }}</ref> Recipients of the cards could then look up the profile of the user with the information provided on the card.<ref>{{cite news|author=Jenny Block |title=Fox on Sex: The Art of Flirting|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,598671,00.html|accessdate=2010-08-14|publisher=Fox News|date=August 5, 2010}}</ref> In addition to the one-time cost of the cards, there was a $9.95 monthly membership fee.<ref name="shark">{{cite web|last1=Taylor|first1=Jordyn|title=Tech CEO Loses on ‘Shark Tank’, Is Visited by On-Set Therapist|url=http://observer.com/2014/03/tech-ceo-loses-on-shark-tank-is-visited-by-on-set-therapist/|website=Observer|accessdate=22 May 2018|date=3 March 2014}}</ref>
If users chose the free plan, they did not pay a monthly subscription fee nor did they buy business cards. Instead, they would download the Cheekd app for free, and hand out virtual cards to any appealing strangers that were nearby.<ref name="shark" />
Line 16:
==Patent lawsuit==
The original business card-based model for Cheekd had been claimed as a patented process by Lori Cheek, as [[US Patent 8543465]]. It was described as “Online Dating in Reverse”. In September 2017, a complaint was filed, alleging that the idea was not original to Lori Cheek.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Crouch|first1=Dennis|title=Reversing the Patent on Reverse Online Dating |url=https://patentlyo.com/patent/2017/09/reversing-patent-reverse.html|website=Patently-O|accessdate=22 May 2018|date=29 September 2017}}</ref>
Cheek responded, stating that the complaint was baseless, and a complete fabrication.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Crouch |first1=Dennis |title=Cheek Responds: The Whole Story|url=https://patentlyo.com/patent/2017/10/cheek-responds-whole.html|website=Patently-O|accessdate=22 May 2018|date=4 October 2017}}</ref> The lawsuit ''Pirri v. Cheek'' was dismissed in a pre-trial conference in New York's Federal Court on April
==References==
| |||