WebProNews

Tag: Patents

  • Nintendo Patents A Wii U Gun Peripheral

    Nintendo Patents A Wii U Gun Peripheral

    Two Nintendo patents granted yesterday reveal that Nintendo is already planning peripherals for its new system, the Wii U. The peripheral patented appears to be a light-gun-style device which incorporates a Wii Nunchaku-type design into the grip and holds the Wii U pad in a position facing the user. An illustration of the peripheral can be seen in the illustration above.

    What could such a peripheral mean for gaming on the Wii U? There really is no telling, and it is not even known if Nintendo will release the device. It could be used to display a map in an adventure game, or it could be used to keep track of ammo or other traditional heads-up display (HUD) elements for a first-person shooter. The most creative use of it that I can come up with on my own is as an augmented-reality view of on-screen elements, such as a night-vision, infrared camera, or a Lens of Truth for the savior of Hyrule. But none of those uses actually require the peripheral. I’m guessing it is simply for an unannounced Wii U Duck Hunt game. From the patent application:

    …one can easily hold the input device 220 as if to hold a gun, and the controller device is particularly suitable for a shooting game, or the like, in which game operations are performed while assuming that the controller device is a gun.

    Interestingly, the illustrations of the peripheral were not the only images in the application provided by Nintendo to the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. There are many images of the Wii U and the devices it interacts with. One of the images even shows a charging dock for the Wii U pad:

    An patent illustration of the Wii U charging dock

    This one shows how a shuriken could be “thrown” on a television screen using a stylus on the Wii U pad. Could that be one of the mini-games included at system launch with a new Wii Sports title?

    A Wii U shuriken-throwing patent illustration

    Here’s a drawing, also included in the patent application, of a person using the Wii U pad as a golf tee:

    A patent illustration of the Wii U pad being used as a golf tee

    What do you think? Does the Wii U look fun? Will it be an improvement over the current Wii in any significant way? Leave a comment below and let us know.

  • Yahoo Claims Patents For Open Source Technologies

    Facebook is really into the open source movement. Just looking at their developer’s page should tell you that they care about developers and aim to provide them with the best in open source development tools. Yahoo has open sourced some of their technologies, but now claim to own the patents to more open source technologies in the latest round of their lawsuit against Facebook.

    Pandodaily reports that Yahoo recently updated its court filings to include open source technologies that Facebook uses within its infrastructure. In total, Yahoo is bringing an extra 16 patents into the fray that they claim to be relevant to the case at hand.

    So what technologies are we talking about here? According to Pandodaily, Yahoo claims patents to memcached which they point out was actually created by LiveJournal and has been in use by every other Internet company since. Yahoo also claims patents on Open Computer, which was created by Facebook; Tornado, a python-based Web server’; and HPHP, software that converts PHP into C++.

    Facebook isn’t one to take this lightly and points out that Yahoo has now become the ultimate patent troll. They’re not only targeting Facebook, but the open source movement as well. They say that the patents they are trying to defend are used by other “innovative, forward-thinking companies.” There might be something in there that alludes to a Yahoo that should start innovating instead of just suing.

    Yahoo’s attempt at extorting money from Facebook through patent trolling is reminiscent of the patent troll in Texas who claimed to own the interactive Web. It’s a desperate attempt at a cash grab and doesn’t serve to protect IP or the software that is created.

    Here’s hoping the judge understands how ridiculous Yahoo’s latest patent claims are. Facebook is not the only one at risk anymore. Yahoo has become an enemy of the Web development community, a community they claim to cater, by attacking these latest technologies.

  • Microsoft Patents a Human-Computer Interface

    This week Microsoft patented a device designed to capture a person’s movements – and it’s wearable. Microsoft already has the Kinect, which can pick up and mimic broad movements, but this newly patented technology would be able to pick up the electrical signals generated by a user’s muscle movements. Though I’m sure Microsoft will come up with a snappier name in the future, the patent application calls it a “wearable electromyography-based controller for human-computer interface.” From the patent application abstract:

    Following initial automated self-calibration and positional localization processes, measurement and interpretation of muscle generated electrical signals is accomplished by sampling signals from the EMG sensors of the Wearable Electromyography-Based Controller. In operation, the Wearable Electromyography-Based Controller is donned by the user and placed into a coarsely approximate position on the surface of the user’s skin. Automated cues or instructions are then provided to the user for fine-tuning placement of the Wearable Electromyography-Based Controller.

    Examples of such a device that Microsoft gives are an armband, a wristwatch, or some other article of clothing. The signals measured by the devices would be transferred wirelessly to a device such as a phone or computer. Or, I’m guessing, an Xbox.

    Microsoft's patent for werable EMG measurement devices

    Microsoft was careful in the application to mention how non-invasive the devices would be, at least compared to EMG measurements that require needles and such. However, I’m thinking Microsoft might be moving in the wrong direction here. The strength of the Kinect is that it doesn’t require a user to hold or wear any sort apparatus to operate it. These measuring devices would require a user to “suit up” to play a game. It’s the difference between walking onto a holodeck and jacking into the Matrix. I really hope users won’t have to look like Andy Serkis to play the Xbox 720.

    Still, we don’t know what Microsoft has in mind for this technology. Gaming could be the furthest thing fron the inventor’s mind. I’m sure there are all sorts of creative ways to use EMG devices, such as for remotely operating heavy machinery or making delicate space station repairs from a surface location on Earth. What do you think Microsoft wants with wearable controller technology? Leave a comment below and let me know.

  • Facebook Granted News Feed Patent

    Facebook Granted News Feed Patent

    Facebook was granted a patent today, which pertains to the layout of the famous News Feed.

    Emil Protalinski at ZDNet points to the patent, called: “Communicating a newsfeed of media content based on a member’s interactions in a social network environment.” Here’s the abstract:

    A system and method provides dynamically selected media content to someone using an electronic device in a social network environment. Items of media content are selected for the user based on his or her relationships with one or more other users. The user’s relationships with other users are reflected in the selected media content and its format. An order is assigned to the items of media content, for example, based on their anticipated importance to the user, and the items of media content are displayed to the user in the assigned order. The user may change the order of the items of media content. The user’s interactions with media content available in the social network environment are monitored, and those interactions are used to select additional items of media content for the user.

    This could have implications for Google, Twitter, Myspace, LinkedIn, and any number of other social networks.This type of information display and user consumption is pretty much a staple of how social media works these days. Facebook has certainly been incredibly influential in that.

    The company filed for the patent 6 years ago, and his isn’t even the first time Facebook has been granted a patent related to the news feed. In 2010, Facebook was granted the patent for: “Generating a feed of stories personalized for members of a social network.” Sounds pretty similar, eh?

    Interestingly, Mashable reported in early 2010 that Facebook had been awarded a similar patent, with the abstract:

    “A method for displaying a news feed in a social network environment is described. The method includes generating news items regarding activities associated with a user of a social network environment and attaching an informational link associated with at least one of the activities, to at least one of the news items, as well as limiting access to the news items to a predetermined set of viewers and assigning an order to the news items. The method further may further include displaying the news items in the assigned order to at least one viewing user of the predetermined set of viewers and dynamically limiting the number of news items displayed.”

    That report is linking to the same patent from today, with a different abstract.

    It will be interesting to see if these patents lead to any major legal battles for Facebook. Protalinski suggests that Facebook may just use it to defend against other infringement accusations. Given Facebook’s rich history of fighting of the other so called “founders,” it’s probably not a bad idea for Facebook to get such things secured.

    I just hope things don’t get absurd, the way patent disputes often can.

    Facebook, as you may know, has been in a patent battle with Yahoo.

  • How Much Of Google’s Webspam Efforts Come From These Patents?

    Bill Slawski over at SEO By The Sea, who is always up on search industry patents, has an interesting article talking about a patent that might be related to Google’s new Webspam Update.

    It’s called: Methods and systems for identifying manipulated articles. The abstract for the patent says:

    Systems and methods that identify manipulated articles are described. In one embodiment, a search engine implements a method comprising determining at least one cluster comprising a plurality of articles, analyzing signals to determine an overall signal for the cluster, and determining if the articles are manipulated articles based at least in part on the overall signal.

    The patent was filed all the way back in 2003 and was awarded in 2007. Of course, the new update is really based on principles Google has held for years. The update is designed to target violators of its quality guidelines.

    Patent jargon makes my head hurt, and I’m willing to bet there’s a strong possibility you don’t want to sift through this whole thing. Slawski is a master at explaining these things, so I’ll just quote him from his piece.

    “There are a couple of different elements to this patent,” he writes. “One is that a search engine might identify a cluster of pages that might be related to each other in some way, like being on the same host, or interlinked by doorway pages and articles targeted by those pages. Once such a cluster is identified, documents within the cluster might be examined for individual signals, such as whether or not the text within them appears to have been generated by a computer, or if meta tags are stuffed with repeated keywords, if there is hidden text on pages, or if those pages might contain a lot of unrelated links.”

    He goes on to talk about many of the improvements Google has made to its infrastructure, and spam detecting technologies. He also notes that two phrase-based patents were granted to Google this week. One is for “Phrase extraction using subphrase scoring” and the other, “Query phrasification“. The abstracts for those, are (respectively):

    An information retrieval system uses phrases to index, retrieve, organize and describe documents. Phrases are extracted from the document collection. Documents are the indexed according to their included phrases, using phrase posting lists. The phrase posting lists are stored in an cluster of index servers. The phrase posting lists can be tiered into groups, and sharded into partitions. Phrases in a query are identified based on possible phrasifications. A query schedule based on the phrases is created from the phrases, and then optimized to reduce query processing and communication costs. The execution of the query schedule is managed to further reduce or eliminate query processing operations at various ones of the index servers.

    And…

    An information retrieval system uses phrases to index, retrieve, organize and describe documents. Phrases are extracted from the document collection. Documents are the indexed according to their included phrases, using phrase posting lists. The phrase posting lists are stored in an cluster of index servers. The phrase posting lists can be tiered into groups, and sharded into partitions. Phrases in a query are identified based on possible phrasifications. A query schedule based on the phrases is created from the phrases, and then optimized to reduce query processing and communication costs. The execution of the query schedule is managed to further reduce or eliminate query processing operations at various ones of the index servers.

    If you’re really interested in tech patents and the inner-workings of how search engines work, I’d suggest reading Slawski’s post. I’d also suggest watching Matt Cutts explain how Google Search works.

  • Microsoft and Facebook Get Cozy With a New Patent Agreement

    Microsoft and Facebook have announced a deal in which Facebook will purchase a portion of the patent portfolio that Microsoft bought from AOL earlier this month. Facebook will pay Microsoft $550 million in cash for ownership of approximately 650 AOL patents and patent applications, plus a license to the AOL patents and applications that Microsoft is keeping. That’s about half the $1.1 billion Microsoft paid for the patents, and Microsoft will, of course, also maintain license for the patents it is selling to Facebook.

    “Today’s agreement with Facebook enables us to recoup over half of our costs while achieving our goals from the AOL auction,” said Brad Smith, executive vice president and general counsel for Microsoft. “As we said earlier this month, we had submitted the winning AOL bid in order to obtain a durable license to the full AOL portfolio and ownership of certain patents that complement our existing portfolio.”

    The deal is just as good for Facebook, which will end up owning a majority of the 952 patents Microsoft bought from AOL. The two companies already have a very close relationship, with Microsoft owning a portion of Facebook, so it makes sense for Microsoft to share its newly acquired patents and their cost.

    “Today’s agreement with Microsoft represents an important acquisition for Facebook,” said Ted Ullyot, general counsel for Facebook. “This is another significant step in our ongoing process of building an intellectual property portfolio to protect Facebook’s interests over the long term.”

    There has been some speculation already about what Microsoft wanted from the AOL patent portfolio, but this new twist makes things very interesting. Facebook and Microsoft have essentially split the cost of the patents, which could be worrying for companies such as Google and Apple.

    What do you think? Will Facebook and Microsoft use these patents to defend their interests or is this just another step toward a an all-out patent war? Let me know in the comment section below.

  • Fark’s Drew Curtis In TED Talk: Don’t Negotiate With Terrorists (Patent Trolls)

    TED has posted a new video with Fark Founder Drew Curtis, which Fark, of course has shared with its audience. He talks about how Fark was sued, along with Yahoo, Reddit, MSN, AOL, TechCrunch and others by Gooseberry Natural Resources.


    TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington wrote about it in early 2011:

    We, along with our fellow defendants, have allegedly been violating US Patent No. 6,370,535, titled System and method for structured news release generation and distribution. The invention underlying the patent appears to be the notion of typing text into an admin system, storing that text on a server, and then publishing it on the Internet. The patent was awarded in 2002.

    Curtis talks about the patent being for the creation and distribution of news releases via email.

    “One of the major problems with patent law is..that when you are sued by a patent troll, the burden of proof that you did not infringe upon the patent is actually on the defendant, which means you have to prove that you do not infringe upon the patent they are suing you on, and this can take quite a while,” he says.

    “You need to know that the average patent troll defense costs $2 million and takes 18 months when you win,” he says. “That is your best case outcome when you get sued by a patent troll.”

    He goes on to say how he hoped he would be able to team up with some of the larger companies that were being sued, but one by one they all settled out of the suit, even though none of them were infringing – because it’s cheaper to settle than fight the suit. He ended up beating the troll by simply asking them to provide screenshots of the infringing content on Fark, and they settled for zero dollars.

    “Don’t fight the patent. Fight the infringement,” he recommends. Secondly, he says, “Make it clear from the beginning that you have no money at all or that you would rather spend money with your attorney, fighting the troll than actually giving them the money.”

    Finally, he says to make sure to tell them you’ll make the whole process as annoying and painful for them as possible. The whole thing, he says, boils down to one thing: “Don’t negotiate with terrorists.”

    As usual, there are plenty of entertaining comments on the Fark post. Here are a few:

    i patented purple shirts. you owe me!

    I just patented commenting on Drew’s TED patent troll thread, so pay up, biatches!!

    I just patented the act of listening. All you motherf*ckers better settle.

  • Patents: The Tech Company Goldmine

    Patents: The Tech Company Goldmine

    Apple has filed a few patents recently that have eyebrows raised. There was the 3D display and user interface, and the 3D camera. As Shaylin Clark points out, having those patents on the books doesn’t even remotely mean that Apple intends to use them.

    Apple could just be exploring possibilities for future designs. Securing a patent allows them to do that while keeping that technology out of the hands of competitors. Even if Apple never produces the product, they hold the patent and could have recourse if someone else builds it.

    Another possibility has to do with the value of intellectual property. Sometimes companies register patents and sit on them just to drive up the value of their company. It’s almost like inventory. In fact, companies are bought and sold simply for the patents they hold. When the E.U. approved the Google buy of Motorola, it was widely understood that the 17,000 patents and 7,500 patents pending that Motorola held was a big part of the deal for Google.

    Apple owns many patents, and it remains to be seen just how many of them will ever see the light of day. These includes such wonders as:

  • A surround sound system for a MacBook Pro
  • A self-timer for taking pictures that won’t snap until the photographer is in place.
  • Touch zones on iOS devices other than the screen (a smart bezel)
  • A 3D eye-tracking interface for iOS devices
  • Lots of “coded magnet” patents that integrate into clothing, sporting gear, etc.
  • Apple also has to watch its back over patents owned by others. A company called Touchscreen Gestures LLC is suing Apple for patent infringement over certain touchscreen technologies that they had patented. That company is also suing HTC, Samsung and RIM.

    Social game maker Zynga was sued over patents that another company claims to hold. Personalized Media Communications filed a patent suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Zynga. They claim that the social games maker has infringed on four of their patents.

    Apple itself has sued Motorola and Samsung, and been sued by SmartData.

    A company called Smartphone Technologies tried to sue Amazon over technology in the Kindle Fire. The reached some undisclosed settlement with Amazon that kept the whole thing out of court.

    One company claimed to hold a patent on the entire interactive Web. They filed suit against over a dozen companies, including Google, Amazon and Adobe. They lost.

    Over the decades, lots of outrageous things have been patented. Many never saw the light of day. We wonder how life would be different if items like these had ever actually gone into production:

  • A condom that plays a song off a chip like those greeting cards.
  • A USB powered candy dispenser to be paired with educational software. It doles out treats when student gets a problem right.
  • A motorized ice cream cone
  • A fork with a timer, to remind you to take another bite.
  • A pet toy. It’s a stick. A plastic stick.
  • Twitter Publishes Patent Agreement to Combat Trolls

    It’s sad for an engineer or inventor to see their work used as a ball-gag to stifle innovation. Too often companies referred to as “patent trolls” will buy up patents without any intention of using them or licensing them fairly. It’s a problem plaguing the tech industry and is decried by many industry leaders such as Mark Cuban and Steve Wozniak.

    Now Twitter has taken a stand in the movement to stop patent trolling by introducing the “Innovator’s Patent Agreement” (IPA). According to a post on the official Twitter blog by Adam Messinger, Vice President of Engineering at Twitter, the IPA is a way for inventors to make sure their inventions can only be used as they intend. From the blog post:

    The IPA is a new way to do patent assignment that keeps control in the hands of engineers and designers. It is a commitment from Twitter to our employees that patents can only be used for defensive purposes. We will not use the patents from employees’ inventions in offensive litigation without their permission. What’s more, this control flows with the patents, so if we sold them to others, they could only use them as the inventor intended.

    “Defensive purposes” seems a bit subjective, but the text of the IPA makes it clearer. The patent-holder can only assert its claim to a patent under the IPA against a company or person who is suing them over intellectual property, against known patent trolls, or to deter a patent litigation threat against the patent-holder. Any other use and the patent-holder must get permission from all of the inventors.

    Messinger stated that Twitter will begin using IPA later this year for all patents issued to their engineers. Twitter wants their designers to be confident their work will only be used as a “shield rather than as a weapon.”

    The full text of the IPA has been posted by Twitter at GitHub. It’s written in patent-law gobbledygook, but careful examination of the document reveals that it is a huge departure from the industry standard. Normally, employees sign agreements that make patents they file the sole property of their employers.

    Do you think the IPA will catch on with other tech companies? Could it lead to real patent reform for the tech industry? Let me know in the comments section below.

  • Google Patents Glass-Type Glasses and Helmets

    Bill Slawski at SEO by the Sea found three Google patents in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office database that could feature heavily in designs for the new Google Glass project. The patents were acquired from Indy race car driver Dominic Dobson and his company, Motion Research Technologies, Inc, on March 30th. That date was only days before the announcement of Google Glass.

    One of the patents, a “cell phone display that clips onto eyeglasses” might come as a comfort to those worried that Google Glass headbands might not work with their prescription eyewear. The patent covers a housing with “one or more first clips configured to removably secure the first housing to a frame of eyeglasses” and a second housing “configured to display the image to the user through the lens opening.”

    The other two patents cover “Multi-use eyeglasses with human I/O interface embedded” and an “Ambient light display and system for displaying data.” The Multi-use eyeglasses, as described, would be very similar to the designs of Google Glass that were shown off. The ambient light display is part of the technology that makes devices such as Google Glass possible, but the patent files also include illustrations of a heads-up display inside of a motorcycle helmet. It’s not a stretch to see military and sports applications for Google Glass devices. As long as they are not actually made of glass, of course.

    Google’s new initiative for wearable smart computing has been the subject of mockery, ridicule, and cynicism. However, there are rumors that both sunglass designer Oakley and video game publisher Valve are getting into the wearable computing market. With all of these leaders in their respective industries pushing the concept, consumers will be seeing these devices sooner rather than later.

    (via Bill Slawski at SEO by the Sea)

  • AOL Power Struggle Stalls Microsoft Patent Deal

    Last week one of AOL’s biggest shareholders, Starboard Value LP, sent a letter to the AOL board of directors calling of a change of direction in the way the company has been operating and making use of its assets. In their letter they call action to help unlock the true value of AOL’s patent portfolio and licensing agreements from those intellectual properties. Of the recent deal with Microsoft, Starboard offers this commentary from the letter:

    “Although management stated its intention to ‘return a significant portion of the proceeds to shareholders,’ we do not understand why the Company would only return a ‘significant portion’. Why wouldn’t the Company simply return all of the proceeds? We remain concerned that shareholder capital will continue to be used for poorly conceived acquisitions and investments into money-losing initiatives like Patch and other Display properties.”

    Starboard says they want to help AOL, but they insist the current structure and day to day operations are not taking full advantage of the assets available to them to increase the value for their stockholders. Here’s what they claim their plan of action will be:

    “As such, we intend to promptly file preliminary proxy materials with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the election of directors to the AOL Board at the upcoming 2012 Annual Meeting. We remain willing to engage in a constructive dialogue regarding the qualifications of our nominees and a mutually agreeable resolution on board composition. We believe this would be in the best interests of all shareholders.”

    Some other shareholders at AOL haven’t taken a liking to this rigid and hostile stance at Starboard and are coming out to support the administration’s current path exclaiming, “Starboard is proving to be a real distraction and they are potentially destroying value to some degree”.

    Supposedly this uprising from Starboard puts the billion dollar patent deal on the back burner for AOL who had hoped to have it completed by the end of 2012. There is no word on what action AOL will take to defend agaist these advances from Starboard of if they are working to resolve the differences mutually.

  • Steve Wozniak: Not A Fan Of Patent-Mongering Companies

    It’s no secret that patent trolls are a danger to innovation, imagination, and a whole lot of other inspiring concepts that make the world a better place to live in. Pick any major technology company and you will without fail find them involved in some sort of patent litigation.

    Steve Wozniak, the man who co-founded Apple with Steve Jobs, is familiar with patents in the technology world. When he designed the Apple II computer, he begrudgingly had to fork over some money to RCA because the company owned an unused patent that Wozniak unintentionally impeded upon. Speaking to the Australian Financial Times, Wozniak said, “We actually wound up paying them two bucks for every computer we shipped just for that simple idea.”

    Given his experience with patent obstacles, it may not be surprising that Wozniak isn’t a fan of patent-mongering companies. Since most of the companies that are involved in the ongoing patent disputes, Wozniak shared his wonderment over the state of technological development.

    Wozniak says that, while a growing number of technology specialists think the patent system should be scrapped, he still believes it is essential to encourage young inventors who aspire to do something new.

    He can appreciate the argument that Apple has now come to represent to today’s entrepreneurs what RCA was to him, but Wozniak believes Apple’s record for continued innovation means it is less guilty than any of the other large tech firms.

    “Apple is the good guy on the block of all of them,” he says. “It is creating so much and is so successful and it is not just following the formulas of other companies – [Apple is] totally establishing new markets that didn’t exist.”

    Well, that wasn’t exactly a surprising opinion, but Wozniak does make an interesting point in saying that Apple is the only company currently trying to shape new markets instead of simply trying to carve out a take from existing markets. As far as developing new technology goes, Apple has certainly been the industry flagship. Protecting that status is part of what drove Steve Jobs to famously declare that he would spend every cent in Apple’s coffers to crush Android, Google’s rival platform, which he claimed was a “stolen product.”

    Think these companies should spend less time sniping each other and perhaps more time just focusing on inventing new technology? Agree or disagree, we want to hear what you think.

  • Test Your Company’s Intellectual Property Awareness

    Test Your Company’s Intellectual Property Awareness

    A new online tool can help small companies and entrepreneurs evaluate their awareness of intellectual property and learn how to protect it. The National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Manufacturing Extension Partnership (NIST MEP) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) teamed up to create the IP Awareness Assessment, available at no charge at www.uspto.gov/inventors/assessment/.

    Intellectual property is a key concern of small businesses owners, who can secure significant competitive advantages by exercising the rights they hold to their innovations. However, many individuals are often unaware of their rights and miss the opportunities they can provide.

    “Understanding and protecting IP is an important step along the path of bringing innovations to the marketplace,” said Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and NIST Director Patrick Gallagher. “We hope this tool will help companies and individuals better navigate the process and become more competitive.”

    The full assessment comprises questions on five IP protection categories—utility patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets and design patents. Five general IP categories are also covered: IP strategies and best practices, using technology of others, licensing technology to others, international IP rights and IP asset tracking. The questions presented in each category have been designed to discover the participant’s overall IP awareness.

    “This Administration is committed to supporting innovative business tools, which help drive U.S. technological leadership worldwide and support a 21st century economy that is built to last,” said Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO David Kappos. “The IP Awareness Assessment Tool will help entrepreneurs turn their ideas into reality and bring them to market faster, thereby creating jobs more quickly, too.”

  • Google’s New Ad Technology Perfect For Those HUD Glasses We Heard About

    Google has been awarded a new patent that seems to suggest that the company will be rolling out a new advertising strategy wherein the ads that are delivered to you are based on your immediate surroundings. And no, that’s not with respect to your online surroundings, like sites you visit – this would use your literal, physical environs.

    The patent, according to the language in the document, includes technology that will be able to detect elements about your environment, such as background noise or even light sources. As you can imagine, speculation has begun as to why Google would want this or what they would possibly use it for. An example cited by Google in the patent document supposes one example in which “advertisements for air conditioners can be sent to users located at regions having temperatures above a first threshold, while advertisements for winter overcoats can be sent to users located at regions having temperatures below a second threshold.”

    Another example cited in the document suggests that the technology would give advertisers an immense amount of control over who their ads are sent to. For example, “a seller of noise-canceling headphones may specify that an ad for noise-canceling headphones be served to a user located in an environment where the ambient noise is above a preset level (e.g., 70 dB). The advertiser may specify that the ambient noise level be above the preset level for more than a preset period of time (e.g., noisy levels detected for at least one hour per day for at least two consecutive days).”

    As you would expect, people are already decrying the new technology as creepy and Orwellian. You may not know this, but Google has a loosely agreed-upon deal (and by “loosely agreed-upon” I mean “completely made up by me just now”) with the general public that whenever they announce some kind of new technology, it’s the duty of the public to sling words like “creepy” and “Orwellian” at Google. Good job, everybody.

    I digress. Unless Android-supported devices are currently hiding some sophisticated, dormant features that Google included in the devices in anticipation that they’d only later have the technology to use said hidden features, these fears seem a little knee-jerky. Given that the main function (and, seemingly, success) of the environment-based ad deployment would rely upon the need to detect details about your environment, this is assuredly meant for something they’ve got in the oven or plan to mix up sometime in the future.

    Hmm. Has Google recently been developing something that uses a person’s immediate environment in order to Google-ize their surroundings? Something that might even be capable of scanning an environment, listening for cues, or even having an accelerometer that can detect speed of motion?

    Oh yeah! Those neatorific Google HUD glasses that were heavily floating around in semi-rumor form last month.

    This environmentally-cued ad technology sounds extremely well-suited for something like the company’s head-up display glasses, much more than for a smartphone or tablet since the ad technology would require input from a device (such as temperature, humidity, sound, light, air composition, location, and speed of movement) that’s already attuned to the surroundings. You would probably need new hardware on the devices for some of that data collection to happen – the type of hardware that may be included in Google’s HUD glasses.

    The HUD glasses will presumably be constantly assessing and relaying information about the surroundings – that’s kind of the point, right, to augment your reality via the display? – and would seem much more ideal for displaying environmentally-associated advertisements like a digital billboard or digital kiosk.

    Search Engine Watch had previously speculated on how advertisements might be deployed via Google’s HUD glasses, suggesting that the device would enable advertisers to “pay an additional bid amount for customers in, say, a three block radius” or even include some kind of real-time bidding. Equipping the HUD glasses with sensors capable of assembling a profile about a user based on the cues of their environment would certainly lend itself to such an advertising strategy as this.

    In the end, though, all of this speculation could fall apart more easily than a bamboo house during monsoon season and Google may have completely different agendas for the technology, if they even decide to use it at all. Who knows what pots are being stirred down in the Google X labs. Anybody else got any other scenarios they’d like to share? Then share’em in the comments.

  • Apple Patents Seamless Glass Enclosures

    Apple really does not want you to open up your iPhone.

    A patent application revealed yesterday that Apple is seeking to patent a radio-transparent glass enclosure for portable media devices. The news means that future iPods and iPhones could come encased entirely in glass.

    The process described in the patent application suggests Apple would create glass tubes, into which they would insert the internal components of a device. A “laser frit bonding process” would then hermetically seal glass endcaps on the top and bottom. The image below demonstrates the concept:

    The glass would allow wireless communications to pass through it, of course.

    While I can’t say I prefer hardware that is not able to be taken apart, this does conform to Apple’s ideals of a self-contained, uniform product. And having a waterproof phone would be a life-changing moment for smartphone users. This does raise the question of where a headphone jack would be located. Could Apple be planning for a wireless-headphone future?

    But perhaps Apple is, as they always seem to be, thinking far ahead on the design curve here. We might all be playing Angry Birds Space on our new iBalls soon:

  • Facebook Buys 750 IBM Patents To Stop Lawsuits

    Facebook Buys 750 IBM Patents To Stop Lawsuits

    After facing over twenty lawsuits last year, Facebook took steps to alleviate the pressure by purchasing over seven hundred patents from International Business Machines (IBM). The purchase includes various technologies used in networking and software application.

    Currently Facebook holds only around fifty patents, but has many more applications filed with the US patent office (around 500). This new acquisition dramatically improves the size of Facebook’s patent portfolio and could be useful in fending off lawsuits like the one they are fighting right now from Yahoo!.

    It looks like there’s going to be a war between Yahoo! and Facebook, and now Facebook is properly armed to engage Yahoo!. We’ll wait to see what happens. In the meantime Twitter will let us know what people are thinking about with Facebook’s new acquisition:

    Oh #Facebook, you’re so clever. http://t.co/tNV1jzqi #socialmedia 7 minutes ago via web ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Facebook Bought 750 Patents From IBM [REPORT]:

    In case there was any doubt that the current system isn’t working – FB Buys 750 IBM Patents To Defend Against Yahoo http://t.co/b5yPSyDT 6 minutes ago via Tweet Button ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Nice! #Facebook buys 750 #IBM patents to defend against #Yahoo http://t.co/0XDAkSwd 18 minutes ago via web ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    And the race is on…. http://t.co/RZaeFiBB 40 minutes ago via Facebook ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Troll Repellant! http://t.co/pR2xGaM3 47 minutes ago via Facebook ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Well, that’s an interesting development! RT @JesseNewhart: Facebook Buys 750 IBM Patents To Defend Against Yahoo http://t.co/GkU3fOeQ 59 minutes ago via TweetDeck ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Facebook buys 750 patents from IBM. Likely as defensive weapons against Yahoo. Watch this space! 1 hour ago via web ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Intellectual property is out of control, example #145,745: http://t.co/hScU0BbW – can’t wait for our dystopian future… 42 minutes ago via web ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Funny->RT @lauriemccabe: IBM yard sale! GOOG buys 1K IBM patents, now FB buys 750 IBM Patents 2 Defend Agst Yahoo http://t.co/em1GFf41 1 hour ago via TweetDeck ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

  • Google Patents Background Noise: No Privacy!

    High-tech device users beware! Google has just patented the technology to filter sound, humidity, temperature, and various other factors from sensors on our devices to analyze and send us more relevant advertising. Google says it will respect our privacy with the new technology, but I think we should evaluate what is truly implied with these patents.

    Number one, this confirms it is possible to detect a lot more about our environment via a cellphone conversation that just GPS coordinates. Second, someone is already experimenting with recording and using this data. Third, you can’t analyze background noise without taking note of the foreground noise, otherwise known as our cellphone conversations. Take a look at this diagram from their patent:

    So essentially the patent office has given Google the green flag on technology that invades our privacy in one of the most fundamental ways. I don’t think a promise from a large corporation like Google is enough to set my mind at ease that they aren’t eavesdropping on my personal conversations. What gives them the right to invade people’s privacy in this way.

    I guess we’re back to the same old argument, ‘how much is too much?’. Are targeted ads really worth giving a corporate giant access to your personal conversations? I don’t think so. Let’s see what others had to say:

    @RoscoeMcLean: Creepy. But innovative. Google patent: Background noise from phone calls could be used to target ads http://t.co/zSuhO2kH 13 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Privacy issues be damned. #Thisiscool. Google patent:Background noise from phone calls could be used to target ads: http://t.co/S6Ys5xhQ #in 15 hours ago via Tweet Button ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Invasion of privacy anyone? Background noise from phone calls could target ads http://t.co/ydTaOoOs 16 hours ago via Flipboard ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    As a marketer, this is a bit much. RT @johnhcook Google patent: Background noise from phone calls could help target ads http://t.co/i90XwByy 17 hours ago via TweetDeck ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Google patent: Background noise from phone calls used to target ads http://t.co/UqHJ4pjU (via @toddbishop) – This may violate “do no evil!” 15 hours ago via Tweetbot for iOS ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    Very cool – Google patent: Background noise from phone calls could be used to target ads: http://t.co/OTB6paXz #marketing #advertising 43 minutes ago via TweetDeck ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

  • Google: Get Ready For More Advertising

    Google: Get Ready For More Advertising

    If you’re completely fed up with advertising and a constant bombardment of lame commercials and pop-up ads, it’s about to get worse. Ever notice that almost everything has changed about the telephone except the procedure? I’ll tell you what I mean; you pick up the phone, dial the number, hear the phone ring, and someone on the other end answers or you get their voicemail.

    Well Google is aiming to put an end to that. They want to sell that dead space and replace it with advertising. So no longer will you have to listen to that annoying ring, you’ll be treated to wonderful product choices and irritating sales pitches. I am sure, at some point, the telephone will become like the internet; your phone calls will constantly be redirected to a number you aren’t trying to call because some advertiser paid for the space.

    If the new privacy policy didn’t piss you off, this is sure to. Apparently the concept is not novel either, they have been doing this internationally since 2008. One company even offered free anytime minutes just for listening to the ads. It’s a growing trend that has now made its way to America. I don’t know that I like it.

    Google commented on the idea of launching the services and holding patents for the technology:

    “[We file] patent applications on a variety of ideas that our employees come up with. Some of those ideas later mature into real products or services, some don’t. Prospective product announcements should not necessarily be inferred from our patent applications.”

    So there’s no telling when this type of advertising will become a reality for American users, but I wouldn’t rule it out this year. Experts say it will be a $780 million industry by the year 2015. I’m sure corporations will want American consumers to be part of it sooner rather than later.

  • How Patents Hinder Technology & Impair Innovation

    The concept of patents have noble intentions, but like all good intentions it travels a fast and fiery road southbound. Look at the state of the patent turf wars lately. Spanning from tablets to train stations, patent lawsuits are sprouting up everywhere and seemingly infect everything. The trend is particularly virulent among tech companies, where Google, Apple, Motorola, Samsung, Microsoft and many others are guilty of patent-mongering not just among each other but to small businesses, as well.

    Instead of inspiring companies to create better technology and services, patents have become “the preshhuzzz” that are fatally coveted by companies hoping to not be outdone by their competition. Rather than play the game and try to win, patent owners more often than not choose to take their ball and go home. That alone would be bad enough, but it doesn’t stop there: before patent owners go home, they also suffocate their competitors with chloroform-soaked handkerchiefs then shoot darts at all the other balls on the playground to make sure that nobody finds a way to play the game later.

    I say most of this with only huge companies in mind, but lest we forget how small businesses are constantly affected by detrimental lawsuits of patent owners alleging infringement and demanding monetary compensation. It’s a stifling atmosphere that’s not good for business and hinders advances in technology. To demonstrate how patents are robbing our society of innovation, the Electronic Frontier Foundation put together an inforgraphic that shows how the use of patents have seemingly backfired on our society and allow “patent trolls” to grind their boot heels into the necks of creativity and invention.

    How Patents Hinder Innovation - an EFF infographic

  • Apple Offers $15-Per-Device Patent Settlement To Samsung, Motorola

    As the Gordian knot of Apple’s seemingly endless patent disputes with competitors twists into a messier situation with every passing day, the tech company has brandished a blade capable of slicing through the tangle and solving the problem once and for all: a cash settlement.

    According to Dow Jones Newswires, Apple offered both Motorola Mobility and Samsung, both makers of Android-supported devices, the opportunity to settle any pending litigation over the patent claims “in exchange for royalty payments to license its patents.”

    The settlement terms essentially mean that Apple would be licensing their patents to its two rivals; Samsung and Motorola, meanwhile, would give up all claims to the patents.

    So how much is Apple hoping to collect from this bounty? The company has asked for $5 to $15 of every handheld device sold, which roughly equates 1-2.5% of net sales per unit.

    Let’s math this out a bit more to extrapolate a fuller idea of how much Apple is asking for in this settlement offer. For example, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 has been a contentious device between Samsung and Apple insofar patent claims go. As of this past July, Samsung’s tablet reportedly sold over 800,000 devices in the United States. Were Samsung to take Apple’s offer on a cash settlement of $15 per device sold, Samsung would be writing Apple a check to the fat sum of $12 million. And that’s just for one device in one country. Add in the plethora of other devices made by Samsung and Motorola sold worldwide that would fall into the net of the litigious patent claim, the total bounty that Apple would stand to collect on this settlement would be in the hundreds of millions.

    While the settlement would heavily pad the pockets of Apple, one has to wonder if such an offer would ever have been extended before the Tim Cook era. TalkAndroid reminds us of how former Apple boss Steve Jobs felt about the alleged patent infringement of rival companies.

    I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong, I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.

    It’s highly doubtful that Samsung or Motorola would accept the terms of Apple’s offer, but still. Even a half-hearted gesture like this signifies a deep, strategic change in the way Apple takes on its competitors.

  • Google, Motorola Ordered To Hand Over Android Info To Apple

    It’s been nary a month since Google’s acquisition of Motorola was approved by both the European Union and the U.S. Justice Department. As Motorola has been deadlocked in multiple ongoing patent lawsuits with Apple regarding the distribution of Apple’s iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, and iPad 2 3G, Google seems to have acquired its way into yet another legal struggle with their tech rival.

    As far as the ongoing patent wars continue, the momentum swung back into Apple’s favor today as a U.S. Circuit Judge has ordered Google and Motorola to hand over information containing details about Google’s Android operating system.

    In a ruling from yesterday, U.S. Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner in Chicago ruled that Motorola and Google must also hand over the information regarding Google’s pending acquisition of the mobile-device maker. According to Bloomberg, Judge Posner scheduled back-to-back trials before separate juries for June 11, with the first set to address six of Apple’s patents and the second to cover three Motorola patents.

    Google has argued that it sought to acquire Motorola as a part of a defensive strategy to remain competitive with the likes of Apple and Microsoft. In a statement elaborating on Google’s need for Motorola, Google CEO Larry Page said that the acquisition was necessary for his company because “Microsoft and Apple are banding together in anti-competitive patent attacks on Android.”

    Apple’s attorneys filed a request from the judge earlier this month arguing that the Google/Motorola merger is “highly relevant to Apple’s claims defenses.”

    Responding to the judge’s order, Motorola objected to the order to share Android OS information with Apple because Google, the company said, is not a party to the lawsuit.

    “Google’s employees and documents are not within the ‘possession, custody, or control’ of Motorola, and Motorola cannot force Google to produce documents or witnesses over Google’s objections,” lawyers for the mobile phone maker said in a court filing earlier yesterday.

    Given that Google Vice President of Americas Operations Dennis Woodside was tapped to become CEO of Motorola Mobility following Google’s acquisition of the company, Motorola’s argument seems somewhat confusing if not altogether specious.

    When asked for comment on the ruling, Google remained reticent. Jim Prosser, Manager of Global Communications and Public Affairs with Google, merely said, “We’re not going to comment beyond the court filings.”