Email Attachment Redundancy Elimination via Recipient List Comparison

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing email systems face inefficiencies due to the unnecessary transmission of attachments to all recipients in group emails, leading to increased storage consumption, bandwidth usage, and clutter, as current methods fail to selectively send attachments only to those who have not previously received them.

Innovation Solution

A method that compares recipient lists between the original email and responses to determine which recipients need to receive attachments, allowing for the selective transmission of attachments to those who have not previously received them, while notifying recipients of which attachments they received.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If attachments are sent to all recipients in group emails, then all recipients receive the attachment, but storage consumption, bandwidth usage, and clutter increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveattachment distributionVSAvoidstorage consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the recipient list into two groups: those who have already received the attachment and those who have not. By comparing the original recipient list with the response recipient list, the system identifies and separates recipients who need the attachment from those who don't, thereby avoiding redundant transmissions and reducing storage consumption.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by treating different recipients differently based on their attachment receipt status. Instead of uniformly sending attachments to all recipients, the system selectively sends attachments only to specific recipients who have not yet received them, optimizing resource usage while maintaining operational simplicity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Ease of operation

If attachments are sent to all recipients in group emails, then all recipients receive the attachment, but bandwidth usage increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveattachment distributionVSAvoidbandwidth usage

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by sending attachments only to the necessary subset of recipients rather than to all recipients. This selective approach sends exactly the right amount of data to the right people, avoiding excessive bandwidth consumption while ensuring all who need the attachment receive it.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Ease of operation

If attachments are sent to all recipients in group emails, then all recipients receive the attachment, but email system speed decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveattachment distributionVSAvoidemail system speed

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSSpeed

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the recipient list into two groups: those who have already received the attachment and those who have not. By comparing the original recipient list with the response recipient list, the system identifies and separates recipients who need the attachment from those who don't, thereby reducing the total number of transmissions and improving email system speed.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by sending attachments only to the necessary subset of recipients rather than to all recipients. This selective approach reduces the total data transmission volume, thereby increasing email system speed and reducing download times for all users.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Ease of operation

If attachments are sent to all recipients in group emails, then all recipients receive the attachment, but the amount of clutter in mail clients increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveattachment distributionVSAvoidclutter in mail clients

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the recipient list into two groups: those who have already received the attachment and those who have not. By comparing the original recipient list with the response recipient list, the system identifies and separates recipients who need the attachment from those who don't, thereby preventing unnecessary attachments from cluttering mail clients.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by treating different recipients differently based on their attachment receipt status. Instead of uniformly sending attachments to all recipients, the system selectively sends attachments only to specific recipients who have not yet received them, reducing clutter in individual mail clients while maintaining operational simplicity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS7756938B2Eliminating redundancy of attachments in email responses

Publication Date: 2010.07.13 X CORP

AI summary

A method, system and computer-usable medium for managing electronic mail (email) attachments. An email message comprising a first recipient list and a first file attachment is received from a sender. A response email is generated, comprising a second recipient list. The first recipient list and the second recipient list are compared and a third recipient list is generated comprising recipients that are listed on the second recipient list, but not on the first. The email response is then transmitted to all recipients that are on the second recipient list but not on the third list, and the email response and the first file attachment is sent to the recipients on the third recipient list.