Email Reply Forwarding with Sender Exclusion

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current email forwarding methods either result in duplicate replies when trying to resend a reply to all original recipients or leave the original sender out of the recipient list, causing confusion and missed responses.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that determines if an email is a reply and was sent to multiple recipients, dynamically populating the recipient field with the original sender's email address while ensuring the original sender does not receive a copy, and sending the forwarded email to all recipients except the original sender.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If the user replies only to the sender using the reply function, then the reply is sent to the original sender, but the other original recipients do not receive the reply

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of replying to senderVSAvoidloss of recipient information
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a 'forward to others' function that acts as an intermediary mechanism. When a user replies to the sender and then wants to share that reply with other original recipients, the system automatically forwards the reply to those recipients. This mediator function resolves the contradiction by enabling the user to easily reply to the sender while also ensuring other recipients receive the reply, without requiring manual intervention to add each recipient individually.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Loss of information

If the user manually forwards the replied email and pastes in other individuals as recipients, then the reply reaches all original recipients, but the original sender is left off the recipient list

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepreservation of recipient informationVSAvoidease of forwarding
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by automatically populating the recipient list with all original recipients (including the sender) when the user initiates a forward operation. Instead of requiring the user to manually add each recipient, the system has already prepared the complete recipient list in advance, based on the original email's recipient information. This eliminates the need for manual input while ensuring the sender is automatically included.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The automated forwarding mechanism serves as an intermediary that manages the recipient list. When the user forwards a reply, the system automatically retrieves the original recipient information and populates the recipient field, acting as a mediator between the user's simple forward action and the complex task of managing multiple recipients. This resolves the contradiction by making the forwarding operation easy while preserving complete recipient information.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Loss of information

If the user goes back to the original email and hits reply-to-all with the replied text, then all original recipients receive the reply, but the original sender receives duplicate replies causing confusion

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepreservation of recipient informationVSAvoidduplicate replies causing confusion
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts and removes the original sender from the recipient list before sending the forwarded reply. When the user forwards a reply to others, the system automatically retrieves the original recipient information, excludes the original sender from the recipient list, and sends the reply only to the other original recipients. This extraction of the sender from the recipient list prevents duplicate replies while still preserving and forwarding the reply to all necessary recipients.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Object-generated harmful factors

If the original sender is excluded from the forwarded email recipient list, then duplicate replies are prevented, but the original sender will not receive replies if a recipient sends reply-to-all

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprevention of duplicate repliesVSAvoidreliability of receiving responses
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-generated harmful factorsVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary notification mechanism. When a reply is forwarded to other original recipients, the system automatically sends a notification email to the original sender, informing them that their reply has been forwarded to other recipients. This intermediary notification ensures the sender is aware of the forwarded reply and can respond appropriately, while the actual reply itself is not sent to the sender to avoid duplicates. This resolves the contradiction by preventing duplicate replies while maintaining the sender's ability to receive and respond to communications.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS7818385B2Method and apparatus for forwarding emails to previous recipients
Publication Date: 2010.10.19 HULU LLC
  • US7818385B2 patent drawing
  • US7818385B2 patent drawing
  • US7818385B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The illustrative embodiments of the present invention described herein provide a computer implemented method, apparatus, and computer program product for forwarding a reply email message. The process dynamically inserts email addresses associated with a plurality of recipients of an original email message and with an email address associated with the sender of the original email message into a recipient field of the reply email message. The email address associated with the sender of the original email message is identified to form an identified email address, wherein a copy of the reply email message is unsent to the identified email address. However, the identified email address remains part of the recipient field. In response to receiving a send command, the reply email message is sent to the email addresses associated with the recipient field excluding the identified email address.