If Motorola or AT&T’s recent patents show, biometric controls are coming for cell phones. AT&T envisions a means to unlock your phone with your voice while Moto has begun developing a means to use a cell phone to deliver a shocking messages to your body on command.

Details on each after the jump…

AT&T/Cingular Biometric Authentication of a Wireless Device User

In 2004, AT&T identified that while security and controls are developing for phones in non-verbal technologies (data entry via keys), that a means of developing security access via voice signals would be just as beneficial. To that end, AT&T’s patent identifies unlocking a cell phone where a “voice selection is analyzed to determine a corresponding selection ID, and a voice print is retrieved from the storage location corresponding to the selection ID and to an ID of the wireless telephone.”

While I’ve claimed that multi-touch is mostly a tertiary feature, Apple and AT&T have the opportunity to use voice controls in innovative ways like this technology today with little more than a firmware update.

Now, for a further out of the box idea…

Motorola Method for Stimulating One or More Areas on a Wearer

Yeah, no lie. Moto has patented a concept to deliver an electric shock to the skin. Read claim 1:

1. An apparatus for stimulating areas of a body comprising:
a wireless communication device that alerts a user of an incoming message through a user interface;
at least one set of conductors coupled to the wireless device, the conductors including a first conductor and a second conductor that are arranged so as to contact an epidermal area of a body of a wearer of the apparatus;
and a power source for creating an electric potential between the first conductor and the second conductor under control of the wireless communication device, wherein the electric potential induces a current flow between the first conductor and the second conductor and the current travels through the epidermal area of the body of the wearer of the apparatus.

Epidermis (Wikipedia) – the outermost layer of the skin. It forms the waterproof, protective wrap over the body’s surface…

Why? This invention relates in general to electrically stimulating areas of the body, and more particularly, to temporarily stimulating areas of the body including muscles for silent notification of an event and/or for therapeutic treatment.

So, could cell phones move from ‘vibrate’ to ’shock’? Not so sure I’m a fan, although it make for a great SNL skit.

Think either of these have any traction?

http://crunchgear.com/2007/08/25/patentmonkey-big-patent-changes-are-here/ While Congress takes a break for August on The Patent Reform Act, two competitors are stealing some of the thunder: the USPTO and the US Circuit of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).

Heads are spinning to keep abreast of the broad, rapid-fire changes that are being dealt to the patent universe. Namely, just this week, the CAFC reversed its view on willful infringement damages in a case with Seagate, and the PTO held a webinar to cover its Nov 1st new requirements to Improve Patent Quality.

An overview with links, and some commentary on the continued shift after the jump

Seagate CAFC Ruling Changes 3x Damages
With its ruling, the CAFC has raised the bar for enhanced damages to “objectively reckless” behavior from negligence. In essence, proof that the infringer acted deliberately in its efforts to infringe will cause 3x damages, while negligence and unknown infringements now have equal weight of 1x damages. The ruling also noted that lengthy and expensive clearance opinions of non-infringement were not necessary to avoid 3x damages putting more burden of proof on the enforcing company.

Looking Forward – While enhanced damages are rare, this move by the CAFC reduces the payoff potential of patent litigation, thus reducing incentive for patent owners to go after broad litigation suits where costs are close to potential fees.

USPTO Patent Quality Improvements
Many IP attorneys had rumored that the PTO was about to enact changes unto itself to lessen the load on its examiners, remove some loopholes in the system, and add clarity to filings.

Examination Support – Patents filed after Nov 1st will be allowed only 5 independent claims and 25 total claims without requiring added examination support, specific filing support will be required for applications with more than this number of claims.

Continuation Limits – A common means to extend the life of a patent is to file a continuation with new claims on the invention which can be better tuned to the market’s adoption of the technology and a new, later date of filing and expiration. The PTO now requires details for how applicants must file continuances providing why claims weren’t filed with the original patent.

Multiple Applications on the same Filing Date – The PTO also has increased the filing requirements for applications referring to the same priority or filing date to add more clarity to applications referring back to the same applications.

Looking Forward – The impact of the 129 page document and related webinar hasn’t been fully digested, but the anticipated narrowing of guard rails means that “submarine patents” that can extend the life of an invention’s protection for years as well as patents with 100+ claims covering a high volume of iterations on an invention are being carved out of the system.

These modifications in combination fit into the theme that the PTO is forcing inventors to document a clearer path for examiners in the filing process in an attempt to clean up the heavy volume of patents being ramped in.

In one day, a suit was filed by an inventor against the PTO claiming irreparable harm as a result of the changes. Whew.

Oh, if that wasn’t enough, the PTO fees are going up. :P

Wrap
Patent owners and inventors have a very different environment to operate in. Lawyers and experts are still sorting out the changes, so be aware that IP based strategies are about to be impacted by these changes along with Obviousness/KSR and Injunctions/eBay. While the Patent Reform Act of 2007 may or may not happen, we will be able to look at 2007 as a landmark year for patent reform without a Congressional bill.

For Even More Detail:
RE Seagate Ruling – CAFC
Seagate II – Patently-O
Changes to Continued Examinations, Patent Applications, etc – Dept of Commerce
Lawsuit Launched to Block Continuation Rules – 271PatentBlog

http://crunchgear.com/2007/08/18/patentmonkey-apple-multi-touch-is-the-new-firewire/

OOOOH, multi-touch: Apple’s going to a multi-touch laptop and mouse.. Think of the possibilities!!!!!

Remember FireWire? Apple poured tons of resources into a superior technology with hopes of driving an industry to see data transfer from device to device in a new, faster way. With 53 patents protecting the project, it represents one of a number of over-hyped, under-utilized areas of technology now that 802.11n has emerged.

Multi-touch on the iPhone is receiving the same hype, but in the long run, its all talk and no walk, here’s seven reasons why…

Seven reasons multi-touch is Apple’s next FireWire:

1. Typing is not a multi-touch process [mostly]. Sure, the shift key is an exception, but the Blackberry alternative works well as a next best alternative.

2. Multi-touch isn’t being extensively used today on the iPhone and Jobs has said that other devices using multi-touch seems improbable. The feature is being treated for what it is by Apple: tertiary candy more than a critical feature.

3. Multi-touch requires computational resources better used on predictive computing efforts, like predictive word typing algorithms. See #5 for more here.

4. Pictures and movies won’t be edited on the ‘third screen’ anytime soon. Apple’s iWeb initiative is brilliant use of interacting with web resources as a “citizen journalist” (I struggle to use the phrase without feeling trendy). Ever use a computer mouse to edit an image? Try translating that to a touch pad, then make your monitor 2″ x 3″ and you’ve got a perfect storm for wasting a ton of money. A double tap to zoom works just as well as two finger scaling and that’s all you’ll be doing with pictures on your cell phone.

5. Touch screen displays are not cost viable for user input, but I’ll readily admit that they have potential to be more broadly applied. (re: the OLED keyboard).

6. Voice recognition is the future, and touch interfaces will wither as the technology advances. Oh yeah, Apple has about 50 patents in that area as well.

and…
7. Nasty finger marks all over your beautiful devices. As David Mackey aptly noted on Josh’s post on the MacBook going Multi in October: “now we can get grimey grease all over our displays on our laptops – not just our phones.”

Wrapping Up
This isn’t the death of the iPhone, but Apple’s passion for voice recognition over the past 20 years will finally pay off in the next five years that will eat this really fun candy that is a short, not a long.

Update: Thanks for the heads up on #5, Sam, it is added.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/08/16/patentmonkey-att-wireless-lockdown-for-iphone/ Recent news that Apple had applied for a means to disable recharging on a stolen device, we now have learned that Cingular conceived an even broader concept: shutting down a wireless device when out of a communication with a WiFi zone.

Applicable to a number of devices beyond just cell phones, AT&T has patented a means to lock out stolen (or borrowed) wirelessly enabled gear…

In 2004, Cingular conceived of a means to shut down wireless devices that communicate with a “short range wireless” network. While at the time this was likely viewed as a narrow category, AT&T has an electronics gold mine with the proliferation of Bluetooth and WiFi enabled devices growing by the day from cell phones to laptops to cameras. Specifically, AT&T can offer a service to shut down key functions on your phone, camera, etc when outside of your network/home/office.

For details:

1. A method for selectively disabling a wireless-enabled device, said method comprising:
transmitting a short range wireless signal using one of
(i) said wireless-enabled device and
(ii) a second device separate from the wireless-enabled device;
receiving a predetermined threshold value from the user of the wireless-enabled device;
measuring, using the other of the second device and the wireless-enabled device, signal strength of the signal;
automatically disabling at least one function of the wireless-enabled device when the signal strength is less than the predetermined threshold value; and
automatically reenabling the at least one function of the wireless-enabled device when the signal strength is equal to or greater than the predetermined threshold value.

Even more interesting: AT&T could offer location-specific rentals where wireless devices are ‘checked in’ and would be turned into worthless bricks if they leave the premises. I’m not even sure AT&T realizes the number of applications making for an interesting future for WiFi devices going forward.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/08/12/manly-arts-festival-for-the-man-in-us/

Pulling my head out of monkey work, it is August in Towson, MD, my home town, and the Manly Arts Festival has arrived.

The event: How did the gentlemen of Hampton settle their differences, show off their physical prowess, and learn the skills they might need at any time to defend themselves, their families, and their country? Historic martial arts!

No, this won’t be iPhone v. N95 or Mac v. PC kind of manly stuff, this will be what men did before all that stuff took our attention away from destroying aliens in a virtual world.

Historic Hampton for more info on the day.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/08/06/patentmonkey-nokia-apple-in-the-lt/ As a consumer, I love the idea of the iPhone (=interoperability with Macs, iTunes, etc.), but in reality there are a number of features that need considering when looking at dropping several Franklins on a phone (e.g. GPS, WiFi, maintenance). Namely, Nokia announced this week that the N-Series line drove sales and profits.

Despite being a big Apple fan, I’m going to lay out some facts from an IP standpoint why Nokia is the horse to bet on…

Apple is a darling of Wall Street, while Nokia’s fortunes have only recently began to see an uplift. But what of both companies’ innovation machines and their potential for long term, persistent success? While patents don’t directly correlate to a company’s strength, metrics do provide a bit of insight into the future direction of each company.

From an patent perspective, Apple comes to the cell phone maker ‘poker table’ with Nokia essentially having been dealt a quarter of the deck, and is getting about 5 to 10 cards dealt to it for every card Apple gets. Sure, a lot of those patents are not very valuable, but as a couple smart brainstormers say, “Quality through quantity.”

In the end, Nokia’s roughly $2 billion spent annually on R&D, combined with a high cadence output of IP, a strong developing high-end phone line and the potential for Google to make the US cellular market for Nokia more open make a solid case for long term success.

Interesting match up by atmasphere…

Which horse would you pick?

http://crunchgear.com/2007/08/02/patentmonkey-sony-ps3-down-kicked-with-more-litigation/

Sony PS3 has to work through a couple litigation suits and can now add the PS3 cell processor to the list. Sony is on the receiving side of a litigation suit that claims that the PS3 infringes an almost 20 year old patent (via the magic of continuations).

Parallel Processing Corporation, which claims to be International Parallel Machines exclusive licensee, claims rights to US patent 5056000. Details and the hefty claim after the jump…

Sony’s PS3 works on a cell microprocessor that is the result of IBM, Toshiba and Sony’s efforts allowing for multi-processing for MMORRPGs. Cool supercomputing gaming stuff to be sure, though, Wikipedia states that IBM’s patenting efforts started in 2001 and Parallel’s patent application dates back to 1988.

Two independent claims are included in the issued patent, claim 1 is:

1. An apparatus for parallel data processing over a plurality of phases, comprising:
a plurality of processors, any one of said processors operative as a master processor, said master processor including means for generating interconnection switch configuration control signals;
a communication bus for interconnecting each of said processors, for exchange of at least control and synchronization information among each of said processors;
a plurality of multi-access memory modules;
an interconnection switch coupled to each of said processors and each of said multi-access memory modules, and responsive to said interconnection switch control signals from said master processor, for selectively interconnecting any one or more of said processors with one or more of said multi-access memory modules, and whereby any one of said multi-access memory modules is exclusively interconnected to only one of said processors during any given phase of processing;
each of said processors further including local memory, whereby one or more of said processors processes data in its local memory before, after, and during a phase of processing;
said master processor further including means for generating a processing phase commencement signal over said communication bus to the other of said processors, said commencement signal indicating the start of each of said plurality of phases of parallel data processing during which any one or more of said plurality of processors is exclusively interconnected to said one or more multi-access memory modules; and
each of said processors further including means for generating a completion signal over said communication bus to the other of said processors said completion signal indicating completion of each phase of processing.

With a host of Justia Federal District Court Filings
Sony Hit With Patent Suit Over PlayStation3 Cell Processor via Digital Media Wire
Sony facing another PS3 suit via GameSpot

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/28/patentmonkey-nokias-karaoke-ring-tones/

This week Nokia received a patent for more than just mere ringtones, but ringtones that can be modified with a secondary tone, or what they call “compound ring tones“.

Oh yes, get all your friends to record singing to your favorite song as a way to know who’s calling. Details after the jump…

Nokia’s new patent covers the use of ring tone variations to assist quickly the different kinds of communications that you may now receive, e.g. email, text or a call. The details of the patent describe the option of modifying parts of a standard ring tone to enable a user to know that an incoming message is an email v. a call. Primarily, the description of the technology appears to cover polyphonic ringtone variations like amplifying or removing instruments from the tune. OK, not so exciting, but potentially practical.

As for the details…

1. A method for providing a ring-tune alert in a communication device operable to receive communications via a communication network, said method comprising: detecting an incoming communication; determining at least one communication characteristic of the incoming communication; associating a first ring-tune enhancement with the at least one communication characteristic; and generating a composite ring-tune alert by appending the first ring tune enhancement to a base ring tune, wherein the at least one communication characteristic comprises a plurality of communication characteristics and associating a predetermined ring-tune enhancement with each of a plurality of the plurality of communication characteristics, wherein the first ring-tune enhancement comprises appending a secondary ring-tune to the base ring tune.

Now, Nokia, if a mobile device can ascertain information about the call source beyond what kind of communication it is to the caller or email source, it is very possible to do more to modify the ringtone by adding a secondary enhancement to the base ringtone.

Nokia has vision that this could also carry beyond a mobile device to a PC platform providing similar auditory notification.

Not that I’m interested in hearing Blaker or Biggs doing karaoke Gnarls Barkley on my phone. :)

Special thanks to PhotoKeith for lending a shot of Gnarls Barkley.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/24/patentmonkey-patent-reform-more-than-just-in-the-air/

“May you live in interesting times”, or so they say. The USPTO and IP attorneys have been handed very interesting times indeed with recent Supreme Court decisions and Congressional alignment in pushing ahead the Patent Reform Act of 2007. History may show the turning point of frustration to be NTP’s infringement case against RIM that almost shut down the Blackberry network. Ever since, a campaign against patent infringement litigation has swung public opinion towards resolving patent gaming.

Here’s a reader’s digest version of the Patent Reform Act’s main provisions and some insights from around the web…

First to File
The U.S. has bucked the trend globally by using a “first to invent” system that allowed proof by inventors showing they conceived an idea before someone else. A filing date at the USPTO is easy to track, and avoids costly contesting cases using less verifiable means to determine the true first inventor.

Post Grant Review
Far more controversial, the Patent Reform Act seeks to open up a window where patents can be reviewed after issuance. Specifically, a patent’s claims can be petitioned by anyone up to 12 months after grant or within 12 months after being claimed as an infringer on a patent. Companies riddled with infringement suits, like Microsoft and Intel, agree with this provision as it provides a timely review of whether the patent should have been issued in the first place. Critics complain that the PTO’s examiners are in place to do such a review in the first place and that a post-grant review is merely than second guessing and that more emphasis should be put on pre-grant funding and put less pressure on examiners to churn through large volumes of applications each quarter. This provision may not make it to vote as inclusion in any form looks shaky.

Tying Infringement Damages to a Patent Claim
The current system allows a patent owner to take claim to profits of a product that uses it, regardless of the number of other patented concepts a product may use. Semiconductors and the iPhone use many, many different concepts that require a large number of patent owners to grant rights to ensure a “clean” product that doesn’t infringe patent claims. The Act’s proposal attempts to separate infringement claims to value that the patent includes. Microsoft’s loss to Alcatel for $1.5 Billion has been used to show that a patent on multimedia shouldn’t lay claim to its OS revenues. Easy to say, harder to assess, especially in court where a judge and jury would need to make a determination of the value of oscillator rings for microprocessors, for example.

Restricting Venue for Litigation
Today many cases are filtered to the speedy and patent owner friendly Texas Eastern District Federal Circuit Court. The Act’s proposal would narrow the venue to logical venues where the owner resides with little room for “venue-shopping” in advance of filing litigation suits.

Applicant Quality Submissions
The Act requires a search report related to an application and the PTO has the right to deny submissions that do not submit one. While previous law required patent owners to submit relevant prior art that was uncovered during the invention and review process, this provision goes one step further stating applicants need to do a search for patentability as part of preparing a case for filing.

USPTO Allowed to Increase Fees as Needed
Insiders have known for a long time that the PTO is a cash generator for the government. With the boom in applications, the PTO was granted more budget by Congress, but future funding was still tethered to Congressional approval. Finally, the PTO can ensure that it can fund its needs (like hire more examiners) to handle its workload.

What’s not in the Act
Hopes for a two-tier system, or deletion of software patents altogether, are not being met. [Maybe the Abstract Factory's proposal of using StarCraft as a means of setting software-based infringements, maybe not, but nice post]

Wrap
Combined with the recent KSR ruling on Obviousness, how good does the auction winner of this $2.86 million patent feel? To be sure, Intellectual Ventures is sitting in a precarious position for monetizing its large pool of filed and purchased patents see a different set of rules get pushed forward in 2007.

Where this all leaves individual inventors and small companies is a great question. Many lobbying efforts are being put forward to ensure big companies and universities’ needs are being kept in mind in revisions of the Act.

The key question is whether this Act can make it in one piece to vote or if it’ll lose steam going into and possibly after the August break. Think any of the Patent Reform Act will be dated 2007?

Copy of the original Patent Reform Act of 2007 via The Fire of Genius
Updates to the Act here and here via The 271 Patent Blog
Is the House getting it right on patent reform? via the Patent Hawk
Can Patent Reform Cross the Finish Line? Chicago IP Litigation Blog

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/19/patentmonkey-microsofts-cell-phone-with-touch-screen/

What if the Zune was a cell phone? What if it had a touch screen on the back of it? What could you do with it? Microsoft slipped in a patent application covering a cell phone that can be used as a touch screen computer mouse for your PC. After searching on the topic, we’ve uncovered Microsoft-two-sided-cell-phone-touch-screen-control-your-PC-by-WiFi patent application goodness. Whew, details after the jump…

This discovery comes on the back of the re-surfaced Apple Zune-like, [ninja fighting] patent application hype last week that John and I discussed. Can there be more things connected on this patent application? Not likely.

Here’s what they’ve claimed:

1. A system that facilitates navigating on a display, comprising: a mouse engine component that detects a location; and an interface component that integrates the mouse engine into a handheld communication device.

Short and simple.

Let the race begin between Microsoft and Apple in the cell phone arena. Sit back, grab a drink, this is likely to get really interesting even if some of these patent applications are getting a bit silly.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/15/patentmonkey-patent-searching-411/ We get asked about how to search patents, more from people that know a little bit, but want more insight into how to search a better. In this post, we’ll give you the five steps we use to perform an initial review of an idea in the patent arena.

While not as comprehensive as Patent It Yourself, techies interested in some 411, come on in…

I’m going to assume that you, dear reader, understand what the different sections of a patent are (Title, Abstract, Claims, etc.) and where to perform searches. If you’re not that familiar with basic patent information, the USPTO has a definitions of a patent’s sections here. Also, while the Quick Search function is an easy way to jump in, I’d advise to learn how to use Advanced Search queries mainly because as you get better, you’ll be leveraging your early skills into more advanced techniques and it is easier to save your search string to use again.

[FYI - A search in the issued patent area should also be repeated in the published applications to get a sense of other possibly relevant prior art.]

Now, for the five steps…

First, define your idea/product concept to get to the ‘right’ search results. Take the idea or product you want to research and write down what you think are the top 3-5 relevant words to describe it in technical terms (e.g. laser, pointer, presentation, pen). If you’re asking how you find the right words, the best answer: “recursive loops of scanning”. As the folks in the competitive intel business say: “follow the 15 minute – 15 hour rule” (or something like that). Specifically, try some search terms, look at results, refine search terms, look at results, rinse, repeat, until the results are looking close to your idea. This high level screen of an idea in the patent arena is just like doing the first step of a Google search.

As a note during this step, don’t try to do more than discover how big or small your search results area is and clarifying the right set of keywords to use. An ideal search results set for the next step is roughly 50-500 patents/applications. If this step takes more than 15-30 minutes, you’re either learning too much on specific topics or didn’t define your search project narrow enough. Getting the keyterms right is your goal and should allow you to know how much more work is ahead.

Expert’s secret: Of all the sections of the patent, searching keywords in the Abstract yields excellent results with less noise. Avoid searching “all fields” which will over deliver noisy results and “title” which has almost no meaning to the content of the patent.

Second, dig into the right search results and learn. FYI, this is about 10 hours of the “15 hour step”. Reviewing patents and applications are best done in two phases:

a. Scan patents for those close to the pin. Specifically, read enough about each patent to understand what the idea is. If its good, then save it in a “go deep” list, if not, move on. This step is going to take about a minute a patent, or ~1 to 8 hours, with a typical yield of 5-20 patents of interest.

b. “Go deep” time on the list of patents you have noted. Now that you have a list, print the patents, read them, and take notes. Plan on spending about 30 minutes per patent of interest. Pay attention to your idea’s differences and similarities. Finish by noting the 3-8 words on the cover of the patent that defines that patent’s invention to you (meta data that makes for great future reference).

Expert’s secret: In the old days, PTO examiners would review classes of patents by flipping through boxes of hard copies, pulling the whole patent for a read if it was relevant. Newer systems at the PTO office allow searchers to do a similar process on the PTO’s in-house electronic system. We like the simplicity and efficiency of patent front pages and use them on our site for that reason.

Third, review the referenced by/cited patents the PTO noted. Now that you’ve narrowed to the key ~3-10 patents, you can read each patent’s “invention stream” to see the PTO examiner’s opinion of related prior and subsequent art. Most patents have 5-20 patent references, so expect about 30 minutes per key patent to scan these lists. Add any related patents to your key patent list as needed.

Expert’s secret: An advanced additional step is to review the class/sub class groups of the patents you’ve noted and re-run a broader search in just those areas (using Advanced Search).

Fourth, check to see if the identified key patents are in force. The PTO has a system, PAIR, that you can use to use to verify whether a patent is active, abandoned or expired (the Status field). If the patent (or application) is not active, then it is free to build upon or use. If the patent is active, and you have concern, then you will want to consider alternative methods to doing the same thing = “work arounds”.

Fifth, for the patents in force, see who owns them now. The PTO has another section that provides information on current assignees, or the owners of patents, and maintains records on who the current owner is (yes, many patents change hands). Large companies, like P&G and IBM, have specific programs to license out technology, and all universities have a mandate to see their research commercialized, so while considering work-arounds, also consider the benefit of reaching out to the company. Yes, this strategy has risks but most entities want to expand the reach of technology, not wave a stick at interested parties.

Expert’s secret: Patents aren’t the only thing that can be licensed if you approach a company. Many firms are interested in knowledge sharing and partnering in manufacturing or supply chain to further exploit know-how.

A last thought: Reviewing the claims is almost always best left to a professional IP attorney. While doing the above will allow many of you to test whether the idea/product you’re considering is worth pursuing patent protection for, the claims of a patent are critical and the language is best analyzed by lawyers. Being educated will make it easier to work with pro’s and will allow you to save a lot of money by filtering out the concepts that have been thought of before.

We’ve found using the above five steps have made our searching process more structured, faster and the time from start to finish easier to predict.

Hope you find what you’re looking for.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/10/patentmonkey-sony-interoperability-is-in-the-game/

Sony’s seamless game system to mobile device published application has me thinking about the allure of the iPhone and the state of hype in the cell phone industry.

Throughout 2007, Sony has had a slew of platform crossing technologies leaked out mostly through patent applications, which end up making for great vaporware, and all possible fanboy excitement has been greatly dampened by Apple delivering the goods. More Sony application details after the jump…

Sony’s published US application 20070021216 originally filed in July, 2005 covers quite broadly the concept of transferring a game in progress from your gaming system to a mobile device. Specifically:

1. A method of playing an electronic game online, the method comprising:
establishing the game using a game console;
saving a current game state;
transferring the saved game state from the game console to a mobile device; and
resuming the game online from the saved game state using the mobile device.

What’s interesting about Sony’s position, more than Apple, Microsoft, Google or Nintendo, is that Sony is truly the one player that could justifiably create a tremendous multi-platform experience. With let downs with the PS3 and BluRay abound, Sony could use, nay, needs to rally around an experiential platform that allows users to take gaming, video and the internet in directions that even Apple isn’t ready for, and in fact may never be interested in. Ignoring Apple and the iPhone should free Sony to be great at other areas home and mobile entertainment.

What should be learned from Apple is beyond the great UI for the iPhone. Apple offers seamless connections to iLife and iTunes on the Mac. Apple’s interoperability appeal hasn’t been fully exploited yet and with iPhoto and iMovie platforms as well as a bit of low-end web publishing in the background, the iPhone has a very long runway ahead of it beyond being just an iPod + cell phone.

With all the hype and excitement around a possible PSP cell phone and seamless PS to cell phone gaming, jump in, Sony, feed the rumors and get people waiting in line for the next great product launch. In fact, it could be the opposite of the iPhone. Hmmm, what would be the opposite of the Jesus phone? Well, anything is better than purgatory.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/04/patentmonkey-samsungs-one-push-cellular-gps-directions/

Getting home, to a hotel or to a friend’s house in the wee hours may get easier thanks to Samsung’s new patented technology covering a means for transmitting directions from where you are to a desired destination location using your cell phone at the push of a button.

Let’s just say this feature is as smart as Facebook opening up a developer API platform. Some potential mash-up applications for this GPS feature after the jump…

Many cell phones have GPS tracking embedded in them. While players are exploring ways to use it for put-you-on-the-map features, Samsung developed a way to pull together where you are, and provide you directions in one step.

For details, the patent covers the concept of bringing up an address on your phone, holding a button activating the GPS for where you are and getting directions from where you are to where you want to be. That’s it.

So, mash-up services that could be built from this:
Plaxo selling a service to get off someone’s contact directory
Taco Bell, Starbucks, etc. vying to get on a someone’s contact directory

Many more for you to contemplate in the comments as well.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/03/patentmonkey-localcom-proudly-announces-patent-for-enhanced-directory-assistance/

Local.com (NASDAQ: LOCM) announced today the issuance of a patented technology for paid search results provided in response to a request for directory assistance. The company hopes to tap into mobile and voice application paid search market using a pay per referral model. Local.com says this complements its recently received location based search technology.

Details, and a bit of commentary, after the jump…

Directory assistance has grown into a business model unto itself. Business models, via business method patents, can be patented. Local.com has patented providing “enhanced directory assistance” via a mobile network, filing date back to July, 2002.

Of note, automated voice messaging systems are considered part of the technology. Microsoft’s TellMe and Google’s Goog-411 could be seen as targets of the press release as Local.com notes its interest in licensing the technology.

For the details, the one and only claim granted is:

1. A method of sharing directory listings via a wireless messaging system in a distributed environment using a computer network comprising:
(a) Maintaining a database including a plurality of directory listings, wherein each listing is associated with a referral phone number, at least one search term and a dynamic, controllable index;
(b) Receiving a directory assistance request in the form of a keyword from the customer;
(c) Identifying the directory listings having keyword terms generating a match with the request;
(d) Ordering the identified directory listings into a phone number result list in accordance with the values of some controllable index for the identified directory listings;
(e) Translating phone number result list into a format that is compatible with a wireless messaging standard;
(f) Transmitting the translated result list through a wireless messaging system back to the requesting customer’s wireless messaging device;
(g) Enabling the receiving message device to automatically callback the directory listing provider requesting a telephone referral;
(i) Receiving the message phone callback and authenticating the caller;
(j) Correlating the callback to a previous request and result set;
(k) Transferring the callback phone call to the corresponding telephone referral number;
(l) Initiating a business transaction to generate billing and revenue transactions for the paid referral.

Will directory assisted ad-sponsored search pay off the same way Google’s ad network has?

via Marketwire and TechMeme

http://crunchgear.com/2007/06/28/patentmonkey-peer-patent-review-starts-goes-to-secondlife/ In the past two weeks, Peer-to-Patent has opened up a USPTO approved project allowing an open review of pending patent applications. Registered members are encouraged to read through the patents available and provide opinions on prior art and obviousness that can then become part of the PTO Examiners review of non-patent references.

Today, Peer-to-Patent announced that they have taken a space on Democracy Island on Second Life allowing members to interact with videos and see information on the project.

Go to where your target audience is, that’s what they say.

Peer-to-Patent Opens in Second Life [Peer-to-Patent Blog]

http://crunchgear.com/2007/06/24/patentmonkey-nec-gets-cell-phone-smart-file-downloading-patent/

Apple notes it is the only player one of two players in WiFi enabled smart phones offering expanded reach when cell coverage is, well, not so good. This week, NEC was issued a related patent on wirelessly downloading files by selecting between cellular or WiFi networks reminding us that the iPhone is going to launch with so many cool features, and will most happily step on some toes in doing so.

NEC has been working a bit with WiFi enabled cell phone technologies. Details on the latest after the jump…

Using a cell phone to reduce download costs, NEC’s technology determines availability of networks and, in knowing charing formats (e.g. flat rate for WiFi + broadband v. variable rate for most cell plans), can automatically determine the cheaper path for a file download.

For a bit of details:

1. A method for downloading a data file to a portable communications terminal comprising:
said portable communication terminal automatically selecting from a first wireless path having flat rate billing and a second wireless path having measured rate billing, said automatic selecting including:
detecting whether said first wireless path is available to said portable communications terminal for downloading said file at the current location and in response to detecting that said first wireless path is available at said current location, said portable communication terminal downloading said file using said first wireless path, and in response to detecting that said first wireless path is not available at said current location, detecting whether said second wireless path is available and, in response to detecting that said second path is available, said portable communication terminal downloading said file from said second wireless path.

With [still pretty darn expensive] all-you-can-get data plans in cellular, download speed may be more important than cost, but not everyone will be up for full access data plans at ~$40/month making this concept worth being expanded upon.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/06/20/patentmonkey-will-the-iphone-be-used-as-apple-tv-remote/

So genesis of the iPhone was sometime back in 2005, right? Interestingly, Apple happened to file a continuation on a patent application around that time covering a Universal Remote for controlling a number of home entertainment devices.

A touch screen, hand held controller with a dynamic display that interacts with your entertainment appliances for information and can control a growing array of your media devices. A very iPhone-looking figure after the jump…

From this and Apple’s earlier Universal Remote patent, we get this interface and device image:

Crazy? Perhaps using your $500 (or $1,936 depending on how you do the math :O ) iPhone to control your flat panel is not logical, but Apple does have a fantastic track record with integration between Macs and digital cameras, printers and other periphery devices.

A bit of detail from the patent:

1. A universal remote control, comprising:
a display screen, a user input mechanism a processing unit configured to display information on the display screen and to accept selection data from the user input mechanism; and a wireless communication mechanism configured to provide communications between the processing unit and an appliance; wherein the processing unit is configured to accept display information from the appliance for display on the display screen; wherein the processing unit is further configured to accept information entered through the user input mechanism for communication to the appliance; wherein the wireless communication mechanism is configured to periodically broadcast a discovery command; and wherein if an appliance is in range, the appliance responds to the discovery command to facilitate communication of the display information from the appliance to the universal remote control; wherein a set of standard graphical representations of appliance-control mechanisms is stored in the appliance and can be sent over a wireless communications link to the universal remote control for display to the user.

OK, so most everything is controlled by IR (and it makes no sense for the iPhone to have IR), but bucking that trend is Samsung’s recently rolled out Bluetooth HD TV for $4600, which it claims is the world’s first.

Apple has proven time and again that it thinks about ease of use. Toying with some code to turn an iPhone into the end-all of universal remotes by trying it out on the Apple TV would be the beginning of resolving one of the greatest problems in modern consumer electronic times (then again, maybe not, but it would be cool).

http://crunchgear.com/2007/06/17/patentmonkey-cell-phone-features-seen-em-once-and-again/

Sorting through this week’s cell phone makers’ issued patents, I found a couple examples of patented concepts (dating back to 2000-2001) that have found their way into the market more than once by means of “fast following”. In this post-KSR patent world, fast following on cool features will likely become even more important for manufacturers.

Seen the above from a couple different players? Take a guess of two phones that use these designs and you can see a few I found after the jump…

Slide up fronts are growing in popularity, with the Chocolate as a notable design…

While not as interesting, the 180 degree spring-action rotation phone style has also gotten a following notably with Nokia…

The patents have quite specific claims, which the above are likely to not have an issue with. My prediction is that we’ll be seeing far more fast following in the days to come.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/06/13/patentmonkey-usb-integrated-antenna-on-cell-phone/

Smart, simple and marketable. Samsung’s male adapter USB antenna for a cell phone is all of these things, yet, it is a feature not easily found. No losing a cord to charge my cell phone on the road, just a friendly USB connection to suck power from anything else in my bag with a port, and, well, power. This kind of universal access would be a major convenience.

More description and why this likely won’t happen…

From the patent:

the wireless communication device of the present invention comprises a body 31 having an input/output port 32 for data communication integrated with an antenna. The wireless communication device as shown in the drawing is a cellular phone and the input/output port 32 is a USB port that projects out of the body 31 of the wireless communication device. In an alternative embodiment, the input/output port 32 may be an IEEE 1394 port.

So there is a cool USB antenna sold on the gadgetshop that allows PCs to receive TV signals. Maybe a USB cell antenna wouldn’t destroy reception, which would be my main concern.

OK, here’s the main reason this will likely not be on the next cell phone we buy. Cell phone accessories are very big business. Specifically, accessories = profits if interface = proprietary. USB isn’t proprietary, hence, doesn’t make most companies that sweet after-market profit stream based purely on a forgettable $20 cable left at home where it does no good.

Wishing: consumer convenience in design > need for proprietary profits.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/06/08/patentmonkey-microsoft-to-take-on-joost/

Two things show a company is getting ramped up to enter a business – filing for patents and lining up a trademark.

Microsoft has done both in the online video arena and could be in a position to take on Joost. A recently filed trademark image and a look at Joost matched up to Microsoft’s video + chat patent after the jump.

The symbol shown to the right was recently trademarked by Microsoft under the following business description:

computer software for delivery of broadcast-quality video and television programming over broadband, cable, satellite and wireless networks; computer software for providing video-on-demand services; downloadable films and TV programs provided via video-on-demand; computer software for transmitting personal photos, video and music over broadband, cable, satellite and wireless networks; computer software for digital video recording; and computer software for providing a programming guide to display available video and television broadcasts and downloads

Interesting. Even more so when reading a recent issued patent that Microsoft received covering delivering network TV + Chat. With momentum building with Joost as a early front running IPTV player, Microsoft could be building up to a launch of its own.

As an overview, Wikipedia’s Joost entry describes its technology as: P2PTV technology and is expected to deliver (relaying) near-TV resolution images. It turns a PC into an instant on-demand TV without any need for additional set top box. News updates, discussion forums, show ratings, and multi-user chat sessions (often linked to the active stream/channel) are made possible through the use of semi-transparent widget overlays.

An example of Microsoft’s claim with Joost’s description in mind:

While this patent may or may not be a direct issue for Joost, Microsoft’s move to get a logo, accumulate a portfolio of IP and a recent purchase of advertising platform aQuantive are a lot of pieces of a building puzzle.

Microsoft Trademarks Video Service [TechAddress]
Microsoft Enhanced TV [CG]