thecolorblue
Honorable
- Jun 5, 2012
- 548
- 0
- 10,980
- Status
- Jan 20, 2010
- 20,173
- 11,146
- 79,540
> from the stolen technology
Really, Tom's? MS (and the developer of the device on which Kinect is based) clearly didn't steal tech from IVS. From the sound of it, IVS merely patented a concept (and an extremely broad, general one at that). Those aren't supposed to be patentable.
Really, Tom's? MS (and the developer of the device on which Kinect is based) clearly didn't steal tech from IVS. From the sound of it, IVS merely patented a concept (and an extremely broad, general one at that). Those aren't supposed to be patentable.
- Jan 20, 2010
- 20,173
- 11,146
- 79,540
The first thing to stop patent trolls would be to have patents expire within 3 years of last commercial utilization by the owner. In other words, if you sit on a patent without applying it for more than 3 years, it goes away. Maybe 3 years is a bit brief, but 5 years should be more than enough for a patent that a businesses is actually using.
The second thing would be to attach significant renewal fees, every 3 years or so. This would help avoid companies from making only token efforts to utilize them.
Finally, if you bring a patent infringement suit and lose, you should be responsible for all the court costs, including the legal costs of the defendant.
These changes could stop patent trolls virtually overnight. The other big problem with patents is the way they're used as an anti-competitive tool (as in between Apple & Samsung). I haven't yet figured out what to do about this, but it has a lot to do with novelty.
The second thing would be to attach significant renewal fees, every 3 years or so. This would help avoid companies from making only token efforts to utilize them.
Finally, if you bring a patent infringement suit and lose, you should be responsible for all the court costs, including the legal costs of the defendant.
These changes could stop patent trolls virtually overnight. The other big problem with patents is the way they're used as an anti-competitive tool (as in between Apple & Samsung). I haven't yet figured out what to do about this, but it has a lot to do with novelty.
You know longer need to reduce to practice. You just need to be first to file now and the more vague the better it seems.
It also seems prior art doesn't count anymore either with these things lately as this was developed in 1989.
http://vismod.media.mit.edu/tech-reports/TR-516/node7.html
It also seems prior art doesn't count anymore either with these things lately as this was developed in 1989.
http://vismod.media.mit.edu/tech-reports/TR-516/node7.html
vittau
Distinguished
- Oct 11, 2010
- 221
- 0
- 18,690
Here's another example of why this patent system fail: http://filmicgames.com/archives/778
What exactly is this IVS company doing with this technology? The only thing these patent trolls achieve is slow down progress.
What exactly is this IVS company doing with this technology? The only thing these patent trolls achieve is slow down progress.
Technology can't be stolen. If you posit an idea, that's a patent. If you build something, that's an invention. These really aught to be separated. Having an idea to have some toy recognize your face is great, but not building it? That's just fine. Microsoft built it.
I wonder how insane patents in the US can be. Anti-gravity, "magnetic forging" of objects, nanomites, Iron Man suits and every other science fiction related 'tech'. I have no idea how to accomplish this, but I'll leave the vague/unspecific patents for my descendants to sue someone in 10 000 years or so.
Facial recognition is an easy task, i can program it in my sleep 😉
Funny how a patent is needed to do what the brain does. We recognize peoples faces every day.
Now, if there is a particular method/algorithm that it patented then I understand, but there is more then one way to skin a cat.
But how can the idea of facial recognition be patented i don't understand.
Touch, feeling, sight, its a common thing.
Funny how a patent is needed to do what the brain does. We recognize peoples faces every day.
Now, if there is a particular method/algorithm that it patented then I understand, but there is more then one way to skin a cat.
But how can the idea of facial recognition be patented i don't understand.
Touch, feeling, sight, its a common thing.
stephen1977
Distinguished
- Oct 30, 2009
- 1
- 0
- 18,510
...TELL ME ABOUT IT!!!!! Geeze, a sue for this, a sue for that! Sue for every bleeding thing. How then will the world make good use of all these patents!?!?! Microsoft just made some good use of 'their technology', now they want to sue. Gime a break already...
Take away: That's why this world is advancing so slowly...you can't develop anything useful without some dummy (who didn't have a clue about 'their' discovery) trying to sue you for 'stealing' their idea!
Take away: That's why this world is advancing so slowly...you can't develop anything useful without some dummy (who didn't have a clue about 'their' discovery) trying to sue you for 'stealing' their idea!
@TheViper
"I don't know about that. These guys are the people behind all of the DoD's bio-interface and bio-security development."
now that does scare the bejebbies out of me, a DoD security vendor wants to make a 'toy' with facial recognition.....
"I don't know about that. These guys are the people behind all of the DoD's bio-interface and bio-security development."
now that does scare the bejebbies out of me, a DoD security vendor wants to make a 'toy' with facial recognition.....
velosteraptor
Honorable
- Jul 20, 2012
- 333
- 0
- 10,810
on their website it lists "patents" as being one of its main business points, stating that they license out there patents to various companys .. sounds like a troll to me.
zolton33
Distinguished
- Jan 25, 2012
- 1,056
- 0
- 19,360
[citation][nom]velosteraptor[/nom]on their website it lists "patents" as being one of its main business points, stating that they license out there patents to various companys .. sounds like a troll to me.[/citation]
They sell off their patents or lease them to be customized for various applications. Kind of like game companies sell or lease their game engines for various games. I would guess this is why they list patents as a good source of income. It would not do much good if the DOD FBI and the CIA and (insert government agency) all used the exact same program. And some times they want it more customized to suit their individual needs. Leasing or selling the base product they are able to make money and those using the patent do not have to start from scratch and have some thing to build on and can focus their energy to designing it to how they need it. Not 100% sure that is what is going on but thats what i get from it.
They sell off their patents or lease them to be customized for various applications. Kind of like game companies sell or lease their game engines for various games. I would guess this is why they list patents as a good source of income. It would not do much good if the DOD FBI and the CIA and (insert government agency) all used the exact same program. And some times they want it more customized to suit their individual needs. Leasing or selling the base product they are able to make money and those using the patent do not have to start from scratch and have some thing to build on and can focus their energy to designing it to how they need it. Not 100% sure that is what is going on but thats what i get from it.
g-thor
Distinguished
- Nov 7, 2008
- 227
- 0
- 18,680
If you look at their website, they have a changing banner near the bottom. It shows a picture of a finger with the title text "Face Recognition", then it changes to a picture of a face with overlay and the title says "Fingerprint Recognition".
FAIL. This company can't recognize the difference between a face and a finger. I hope their lawyers are better at this stuff.
FAIL. This company can't recognize the difference between a face and a finger. I hope their lawyers are better at this stuff.
vittau
Distinguished
- Oct 11, 2010
- 221
- 0
- 18,690
[citation][nom]vittau[/nom]Here's another example of why this patent system fail: http://filmicgames.com/archives/778What exactly is this IVS company doing with this technology? The only thing these patent trolls achieve is slow down progress.[/citation]
I really wish these people thumbing down stuff would provide actual arguments for doing so.
I really wish these people thumbing down stuff would provide actual arguments for doing so.
[citation][nom]nieur[/nom]I think there should be new department in patent office which will provide the service of checking the requested device beforehand whether it infringes any patent or not. Once it is cleared by them no one should be allowed to sue that device.[/citation]
That would be ideal but break the mold of how the patent office makes their money. It's a non-profit but like any organization they want their paychecks just as much as anyone else.
The more patents they grant the more money they make. It's that simple. The system is broken from the ground up.
That would be ideal but break the mold of how the patent office makes their money. It's a non-profit but like any organization they want their paychecks just as much as anyone else.
The more patents they grant the more money they make. It's that simple. The system is broken from the ground up.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram