"Charging mobile devices simply by heat or the motion of our body has been an idea.....
IBM has been predicting such a technology.....
The patent application, filed in June of this year, could conceivably hint to a power supply"
etc,etc --> does anyone else think that innovation should only be rewarded when an actual prototype has been built and proven to be , erm, actually 'innovative'
--> i.e. does this type of activity (early (theoretical) patent with no prototype) block all future competitive activity in the (legal) area surrounding the patent. Is this really a good thing for open innovation? Do we need to change the way patent applications work?
They didn't patent an actual implementation, they just pre-emptively patented an unworkable idea so that they can troll Samsung wheneve Samsung actually figure it out.
However, there is no way to generate any usable amount of electricity from body heat or motion. There is no viable function to generate electricity from the ever-so-slightly-higher than ambient human body temperature, and any electricity generated from motion is going to be relative to the (tiny) mass of the generator assembly of the charging device. It would be more efficient to make the back of the phone a solar cell(a la ye olden solar calculators from the 90s) than to use motion or body heat, and any freshman engineering major knows that.
Please, patent your stuff once you have diagrams and blueprints for it. When everyone can actually see that you have legitimately engineered a new device, a patend should be granted to you. Please, again, stop trying to patent IDEAS.
[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]To Apple :3Please, patent your stuff once you have diagrams and blueprints for it. When everyone can actually see that you have legitimately engineered a new device, a patend should be granted to you. Please, again, stop trying to patent IDEAS.Thanks-The Average Tech-Informed GuyWith copy to: The US patent department.[/citation]
Please reform the US Patent Office, and give it extra funding so it has more staff to handle the patent application overload.
Probability of them caring: 1%
Probability of them cutting each others' throats over abortions, gay rights and etc: 99%
Apple attempting to patent coils printed on PCBs or equivalent... some RFID chips have already been there several years ago. Companies should be able to preemptively sue the PTOs for granting frivolous patents with abundant and "ancient" prior-art.
Aww, the Apple haters are flocking to another article about Apple and patents, trying to justify their hate for just one company and one brand of phone with all sorts of excuses, like only Apple should have to have blueprints and prototypes, while the rest of the industry gets to continue patenting the way it is now.
Changing the way patents are granted is a noble goal, but it will take a gargantuan effort. Attacking Apple for using the systems like its competition does is just silly.
Apple has brought the entire industry to the state it's in today, had they not done so the lack of innovation would have us with phones barely beyond the N95 today. They bring the industry forward, they are at the heart of innovation, and even if your non-Apple preferred brand has to *steal* from Apple to keep up, you'll benefit as well. Just as long as they get caught red handed in court.
The watch version of this was pioneered by Seiko (Kinetic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_quartz
I can't for the life of me see how this could generate enough electricity to juice current mega power hungry smartphones. Even a simple mp3 player (e.g. iPod Nano) would draw a LOT more power than this type of technology could produce. Maybe Apple has something new to bring to the table, but this smells like vapor to me.