Help: I need to contact Google's search algorithm engineers

[Algernon]

I asked this question over in the search technology section, but I didn't get an answer :(

Put simply, I would like to get in contact with the search algorithm people at Google (or any of the other search engines).

Our company has patented (well applied for) a totally new search algorithm for significantly improving search relevancy. We are aware of the literature in this area and it does seem that it is novel - saying this there could always be a submarine patent out there, but such is life.

What I would like to do is talk to the right people at Google (or any of the other search engines) about it, but we are unsure of who we should approach (we are a biotechnology/bioformatics company- web search is a little outside our area). I thought of writing directly to Matt Cutts, but after he mentioned in his blog that he has more than 8000 unread emails I don't think that this will be too successful.

Does anyone have any advice on how to best proceed? PM is probably most appropriate.

Thanks

[Jenstar]

I would guess contacting the email address listed for "Business Proposals" on http://www.google.ca/intl/en/contact/index.html

If they cannot help, they may be able to direct you a bit better to the right people.

[Algernon]

I would guess contacting the email address listed for "Business Proposals" on http://www.google.ca/intl/en/contact/index.html

If they cannot help, they may be able to direct you a bit better to the right people.

Thanks Jenstar for the suggestion. I had thought of this, but I have enough experience dealing with large technology companies that I know that unless you speak to the right people you are wasting your time - in the more than 20 business development divisions I have dealt with in the past not one was was ever helpful or even competent :( . Every single successful business partnerships we have had has come from contacting directly the right technical people.

[ThouShaltSeo]

here's my advice: if you applied for a patent, odds are that they already know about it--if it's a valid patent.

[Algernon]

ThouShaltSEO nice idea except that the patent system is totally broken. There is a minimum of 18 month delay before a patent application is even published and a further delay of 3-5 years before it is granted (hence the problem with submarine patents). I would expect that by the time our patent is granted (assuming that it is) then it will be by that time worthless.

As an aside, in our normal line of work (biotech) we have had whole product lines developed, launched, and retired before the patent is even examined :eek:

[Rob]

Actually I have used the help request suggested above and they were very quick - I got a response in 2 days.

Actually I got a canned response shortly after the request, but did get an actual human response within a couple days - why not at least try it?

[Algernon]

Rob this will be my option of last resort. As I mentioned in my previous post my experience of dealing with business development departments is very, very negative - they generally sit on a proposal for 3 - 6 months then reject it without any explanation. When I have later made contact with the right internal people they tell me that they never heard of the project!

It may be possible that Google's unit is different, but if I have any other alternative I would rather not find out.

So nobody can help me at all :(

[Gem]

walk in their frontdoor with it.

if you are that confident with it, beat a trail to the Googleplex and ask to speak to the manager. :cool:

and it gives you a day out of your office.

[Algernon]

walk in their frontdoor with it.

if you are that confident with it, beat a trail to the Googleplex and ask to speak to the manager. :cool:

and it gives you a day out of your office.

More likely a day in their waiting room :) The question is which manager would I ask for once I got there? One thing that does make this a little more difficult is that I am on the other side of the world (Australia). Nice 14 hour flight for me for a quick drop in :eek:

Doesn't anyone from google, yahoo or MSN read these forums - or are they just not interested in anything new :(

[Robert_Charlton]

Doesn't anyone from google, yahoo or MSN read these forums - or are they just not interested in anything new :(

My guess is that they may not want to hear it unless it is submitted via extremely trusted channels (whatever those might be). Don't underestimate their hassles with lawsuits and the like these days. Often, these ideas are "in the air," likely to be developed by several parties more or less simultaneously.

Google has a lot of excellent search engineers working for them right now. Suppose you came in and pitched an idea much the same as something these engineers had been working on for several years. How might that be resolved?

Chances are you'd have to sign away more rights than you'd be comfortable doing just to get Google to listen to you.

[Algernon]

Bingo Robert ;) What I was hoping for was to get one the SE algo guys to show enough interest in what we are doing for them to contact me "unofficially" via this forum to find out what we had. This way they could look at the technology, and only if the they like what they see, would they have to move things down the official path.

I have had enough experience dealing with IP issues and large technology companies to know that going through the front door is a complete waste of time - the legal people won't even let the R&D guys look at anything novel in case they open themselves up for litigation. Unfortunately, only one person has shown enough interest to actually contact me and they don't appear to have been from the big three :(

[dannysullivan]

Doesn't anyone from google, yahoo or MSN read these forums - or are they just not interested in anything new
They do read, they are interested in new stuff, but you're making a dime a dozen pitch. Everyone's got a new patent or discovery they think will revolutionize search. Flip it around and decide what you'd do, if you had everyone coming at you. It probably isn't to try and engage you in a public forum or hope that you'll stumble across the magic acquisition in a forum thread.

Go to the business development channels. Doesn't mean you can't do other things, but at least start on that.

If you've applied for a patent, perhaps actually publish what you've applied for, if you don't feel it will weaken the patent. But if you think, as you said, that it will be worthless by the time you get it published, what exactly are you offering? You're suggesting you've got an idea that they'll probably figure out anyway and not need your patent. Sorry, that's not a really compelling pitch.

In short, you want attention, put something out there people can see. You can go back to Google if you want the classic model. Larry and Sergey got the same biz dev run around you are fearing. But at least they did it, plus they ran their own service as well that others could see. So when the biz dev thing didn't work, they had another route.

[Algernon]

Hi Danny thanks for your thoughts. I hope you don't think I am being rude (it is your forum), but I actually didn't make any pitch - all I asked for is if anyone had any ideas how I would be able to get in contact with the SE algo people. Also I didn't say that the patent would be worthless by the time it is published, I was just pointing out to another poster how badly broken the patent system is so that by the time it is granted it will be worthless.

I have many years of experience in IP licensing in the biotech field (both selling and buying) and have learnt that nothing ever comes of going through the front door. Having said this the best technology we ever bought came in via the front door, but then we don't have a business "development" office to help keep good idea out :D

So if any of you search algo guys out there want to see the patent PM from a new anonymous account and I will send it to you - no need to involve your legal department just yet ;)

[orion]

Another possibility: use a terciary approach.

Try contacting the technology transfer office of a university that has collaborative research with a search engine company.

Also look at the SBIR programs of the small business administration in your (USA) state. They can also help you with fundings or with matching your research projects with entrepreneurs/academics.

Just don't dilute your IP with too many showcasing around.

Orion

[Algernon]

Orion this is a great suggestion, there are only two problem:

1. I need to make sure the person that I speak to has credibility with the search engine. They need to be somebody who when they say to search engines "you must look at this" the search engines will look at it seriously. I don't know who these people are. PM me if you have any good suggestions.

2. Even if I find somebody from outside who has the clout to recommend something, then I actually face the problem of convincing them to take the time to read and understand the patent. I know from my own background (biotech) that these people are incredibly busy and without a recommendation from someone they trust they won't look at it. Does anyone here know someone with clout and is trusted by them want to PM me?

As for your other suggestions I am unfortunately Australian so while we are virtually the 51 state we not eligible for USA SBIR grants :(

I understand the importance of not shopping a technology around (as I mentioned before I am very experienced with IP issues in the biotech field) - it is exactly this reason that I am trying to get help here finding the right contact. I would love to tell you all about the algorithm as I think it is very clever, but I don't think that it would help.

[orion]

Understood and I feel your pain.

Most large univs have a technology transfer or entrepreneur office. If you chose to contact them, explain precisely what your contact requirements are. To start, just pick up the phone and ask the univ for such or similar office or dept and explain your situation.

At least here in the states, a good advice is to submit to the USPTO a DD (Document of Disclosure, $10.00 bucks -at least, last time) before doing anything. The DD is good for up to 2 years. I don't know if a similar remedy is in Australia.

Good luck

Cheers

Orion

[Algernon]

Orion thanks for the advice about the DD document (should be very helpful for anyone reading this thread), however, as we already have a full patent application in the system it is not really relevant for me.

I am actually also an academic at an Australian University (I think I have disclosed enough information about myself that someone should be able to work out who I am - email me if you think you know:) ) and the last group of people I would ever approach would be the tech transfer office of an university. It is possible that the US TT offices are very different to the Australian, but my experience with several here is they are the least helpful and least competent people I have ever had the misfortune to deal with. The thought of approaching a tech transfer office brings out a similar feeling to the thought of going to the dentist :D

Now for a little rant. I am very surprised that Google is not monitoring for people like me more actively. They really offer nothing unique other than better search relevancy. If they are to remain number 1 (and support their astronomic share price) they must insure that they hoover up any algorithm of even a small possible threat to page rank. Our patent may not be a threat to PR (I think it is but I could be wrong ;) ), but can they afford to take the risk? There are a lot of very smart people in the world who don't work for google and somewhere someone (maybe even some guys at an Australian biotech company) will come up with a better algorithm and then boom!

[bhartzer]

I need to make sure the person that I speak to has credibility with the search engine
Then go to one of the "meet the engineers" events that they hold at the search engine conferences. I attended one last August at the Google headquarters/Google Dance and it was very informative--got to meet some of the engineers themselves.

Hang out where they hang out. Talk to them informally about it.

Or build you own search engine. If it's good enough then people will end up using it.

[Algernon]

bhartzer while I would love to go to one of these events (they sound like a lot of fun) I don't think that they would be an ideal environment to discuss a new search algorithm in depth. What I need is a minimum of 4 hours of the appropriate peoples full attention - if the idea could be pitched in 30 seconds over canapés then someone else would have already thought of it long ago :D

[oilman]

>>I don't think that they would be an ideal environment

but going on an on about it here in the forums is an ideal environment?

You've been given several options here and you simply shoot them down one after the other without even trying them. It appears so far that you've not actually done anything in the way of attempting to contact Google or any other search engine.

If you want an 'in' to one of these guys get on a plane and come over here for SES. At the very least contact Google using the url in recent posts. Just because your past experience with tech companies hasn't panned out doesn't mean it won't work with Google. Google is not a typical tech company.

[Algernon]

Oilman I don't think I have gone on about it at all. I have asked for help and when people have offered their advice I have made the effort to explain why I don't think their suggestions are ideal. I could have simply shut up, but instead I have taken the time to thank everyone and explain why. I have done this so that others in a similar position to me can learn - I thought that what these forums are about?

As far as contacting Google directly through their business development office I have not "shot" this down, just explained why this is my least desired option. I am exploring many options, one of which is asking for help here.

[Jenstar]

It seems as though you are just hoping that a Google algo engineer will stumble on this thread and contact you that way. That isn't how it's going to happen.

The best advice is to contact them through the contact channels they advise, or to make your own contacts by attending one of the engineer events at an industry conference. You have to make it happen, it's not just going to come to you because you post on a forum about the next big idea in search. You have been given some great advice, so follow through on some of them. Many people have made engineer contacts through the conferences and meet the engineers events, including many members of these forums. And someone has stated their contact email resulted in a response within a couple days. You could have had your contact by now through that channel ;) As Rob said, why not try it, because as oilman said, Google is not your typical tech company.

[Algernon]

It seems as though you are just hoping that a Google algo engineer will stumble on this thread and contact you that way. That isn't how it's going to happen.

The best advice is to contact them through the contact channels they advise, or to make your own contacts by attending one of the engineer events at an industry conference. You have to make it happen, it's not just going to come to you because you post on a forum about the next big idea in search. You have been given some great advice, so follow through on some of them. Many people have made engineer contacts through the conferences and meet the engineers events, including many members of these forums. And someone has stated their contact email resulted in a response within a couple days. You could have had your contact by now through that channel ;) As Rob said, why not try it, because as oilman said, Google is not your typical tech company.

Jenstar I have not ever explicitly stated what I really would like to happen - all I ever ask for was help making contact with the the algo people at the major search engines. The reason why I did this is I didn't want to bias the responses and miss a great approach that I hadn't though of - I had actually thought that my aims were so obvious that I didn't need to state them outright (stupid me).

As I was totally wrong, I think I should say what I wanted to achieve, at least so that others interested in this topic can learn something. What I wanted was to find a low level link in the "chain of credibility" that I could I could follow to eventually to make a presentation to the right people within one (and hopefully all) of the major search engines. This initial contact could have been a low level employee at one of the search engines, or what I though more likely, somebody who knew somebody who worked at these organisations (my perception as an outsider is the search community is pretty small and incestuous). My aim was to convince the first contact of the value of the patent and then progress up the chain. This is the only approach that I have ever seen or heard of working (other than having a rich mummy or daddy), and one that I have used myself very successfully in the biotech field. Unfortunately, it failed as I have not made contact with anyone :(

I would like to once again like to thank all the people that offered suggestions and I hope that none of you were offended by my explanations of why I they are not my preferred option.

[PhilC]

Here's a suggestion that you won't shoot down in flames, because it's your own suggestion. Contact Matt Cutts. You can do it in his blog, but privately.

He told people the way to do it. Create a new username and simply post. State that the post is not for publication. He always reads posts from new people before he allows them to be published. He sometimes has a backlog but it's not often, and I think he's pretty much up to date right now.

[BradBristol]

So is taking a look at this 'new' search algo (or it's results) reserved just for the big three or can anyone join the party? I'd like to take a look and see if what you've got is any good.

How about some general info on the algo; Like what kind and size of a data sample did you use? How did you determine relevancy of the results your algo produced? How flexable is your algo? Can it scale?

FYI, if I were selling a 'new' search algo, the big three Search Engines would be the last place I would market this kind of product.

[PhilC]

Brin and Page tried to sell their engine to Yahoo!, but Yahoo! didn't have their own engine at the time. I sometimes wonder if people think that Yahoo! missed out, but I don;t think so. If they'd taken it on, they wouldn't have done the same with it as Brin and Page did.

[rogerd]

Personally, I like the "business proposal" contact. If you have sufficient credibility in the field, your idea won't automatically end up in the reject bin.

As an alternative approach, you could try the legal department. That's the last place I'd normally go to pitch a business idea, but when you are talking about IP stuff you'll end up dealing with them early in the game no matter how it plays out. They may have an established procedure for this sort of thing. If you start talking about your new super-secret patented algo-enhancer, MC or any other Google engineer/exec will clap his hands over his ears and start shouting, "I'm not listening! I can't hear a thing you are saying!" At least, if Google wants to avoid lawsuits down the road that's what they'll do. Tech companies are wary of listening to even the most harebrained ideas (not that yours falls into the harebrained category ;)) to avoid a situation five years later when someone comes back and says the firm's new technology was based on his idea. They'll normally either refuse to listen or have you sign a raft of documents protecting them from anything and everything.

[Algernon]

PhilC

Thanks for the suggestion, but Rogerd points out the difficulty with this approach. It is very likely that Matt C. will refuse to even look at the patent because of the potential legal problems. Edit: Your suggestion has given me an idea that I will now try - thank you :)

I think that Yahoo made a huge mistake by not listening to Brin and Page - imagine how much they would have been worth now if they owned Page Rank and no Google existed!

BradBristol

PM if you are really interested.

Rogerd

You have summarised beautifully the pointlessness of contacting a large tech organisation like Google directly - all you end up talking to is their legal/ business development division (who won't have a clue about the technology) and who's main job is preventing their engineers learning about anything new!

As for credibility in the field I have none. Web search algorithms are totally outside my area - I am a scientist in the biotech/bioinformatics area (I do at least have a PhD unlike some other famous people ;) ). This is why I am trying to get in contact with someone here who can look at the algo and have the credibility to say to the Google and co "You must look seriously at this as it could do to you what happened to Altavista". So far I have not had much luck getting such people to contact me :(

Thanks once again for all the suggestions - please keep them coming :)

[Algernon]

Well in case anyone is interested in this thread (I doubt it) I have had no luck getting in contact with any of Google's (or any of the other search engines) algo people :(

I am about to try going through the front door (metaphorically). I will let everyone here know how successful this approach is.

[simons1321]

If you seriously have an algo that is better than Google's... then why not do exactly what Google did to engines like AltaVista and BUILD YOUR OWN SEARCH ENGINE! If it produces better results and you can market it effectively, then you'll be a billionaire in a year.

Like Danny said in an earlier post...
Just picture how many times a day Google is contacted by people just like you about how they have some better algorithm or how theyve improved Gmail or how they can improve PR or how they can do this or that or whatever. It's probably the same with microsoft and yahoo as well.

And as for finding a Google contact on a forum... There's no way i'd give up my Google contacts and risk losing them because a scientist claims he has a better algorithm. Show me something that proves your algo is better than Google's and then maybe i'll risk losing my contacts.

You want to get noticed by Google? Here's how... build your own search engine and market it like crazy. Buy up the top spots for words like "google" and "search engine" in the Google PPC results. If you become a threat to Google, they'll notice, but by then it would probably be wiser to keep it for yourself and try to dethrone Google or atleast steal some traffic and advertisers.

If thats not an option for you, then i'd get in contact with business brokers, angel investors, or general investment firms. Generally, these types have lots of big time contacts in almost any industry since they're usually the ones who give companies like G their startup capital.

But to be brutally honest with you... it doesn't even matter that much anymore whether Google's results are the best or not. They've built such a huge brand over the past couple of years that they could spit out the worst results and still be one of the top search engines (in fact, sometimes they DO put out some of the worst search results, IMO). Just like Microsoft with windows. Its not the best operating system anymore, but because they have such a huge brand and huge market share, even when companies like Linux, Mac, etc make operating systems that are 10times better they still have a hard time dethroning microsoft.

Actually if I were you, i'd go find a company with a huge, booming brand name who is willing to integrate search into their business model and try to sell them on my "better than G algo." Then i'd use the popularity and marketability of the brand to launch a search division of that company. Think Apple Search or Myspace search.

[dannysullivan]

I'm going to close this thread now. I think it has run its course.