Now I will discuss another Ted Talk. Overall, these are super fascinating, and I am glad we had the opportunity to discuss them in class. I will now look at Drew Curtis and his discussion of patent trolls.
Last year, Drew’s company was sued along with MSN & Yahoo by a patent troll- Gooseberry Natural Resources. They owned a patent for news releases via email. It may seems strange, but it can be patented. Take something that is already done and patent it. The problem is that the mechanisms are obscure and most of these lawsuits are settled and disclosed.
However, his company was not in violation of this patent. But when you are sued by a patent troll, you have to prove that you don’t infringe on the patent they are suing you with but this takes so long. It costs $2 million and takes 18 months- and this is the best case scenario. No companies infringed on this patent but they still settled. They settled because it was cheaper. It would also constitute major distraction from your company.
When it finally came around to the discovery phase- Drew asked Gooseberry Natural Resources to send screenshots of his company actually infringing on this patent. However, no such screenshots existed- but all of the sudden they wanted to settle. And wanted to close it out ASAP. His response was “NOTHING”. He didn’t have high hopes for that outcome, but THEY SETTLED! There is no non-disclosure agreement on this case because he took it off.
He learned three things: don’t fight the patent, fight the infringement. Second, make it clear that you have no money or you would rather spend money for your attorney then giving it to them. Thirdly, Make sure you tell them you make this process as annoying and painful as possible- it is generally their policy but use it on them.
Comes down to one thing- don’t negotiate with terrorists (in his words). He says they have done more damage- $500 billion to be exact- to our economy than many other pressing issues. Although, there isn’t a simple solution or a solution- he does have an idea- just do the same!
Overall, it was a very entertaining and funny talk and it was good to learn that in some cases you can have power in these situations.
This week we discussed in class the Ted talks. Abigail assigned us to analyze two Ted talks. For this first one, I will be looking at Johanna Blakley's talk about fashion. The title of her Ted talk is called lessons from fashion's free culture.
Johanna starts off with a story about an Italian fashion designer who found a jacket from a little shop in France. She is analyzing and staring at the jacket and while she plans to purchase the jacket, her main objective from purchasing the jacket is to replicate it. The academics in the world may think this is plagiarism, but in fashion- it is genius.
Is this illegal?
No, it is not. In the fashion industry there is very little intellectual property protection. There is only trademark protection. It means that anyone can copy anyone and sell it as their own design- they just cannot copy the trademark logo. That is why some companies blast their logo on their items since it is much harder to copy exactly.
Why?
Long ago the patent offices decided that clothing should not be patented because it is too utilitarian. They did not want designers owning basic blocks of our clothing- but "too utilitarian"- not really. Maybe unnecessary or silly but not too basic.
Argument
Because there is no copy right protection, fashion designers have been able to elevate clothing into something considered art. Because there is not copyright it is very open minded and spurs innovation and growth while also recycling old successful and timeless pieces. The magical side effects of a culture of copying, then there are TRENDS! It is legal for each person to copy one another. If you talk to any designer they say their main inspiration comes from the street and where they get their creative inspiration- making it a both top-down and down-top industry.
When there are lawsuits, they loose more often than winning because the courts say you do not need protection for clothing. Here is a great example of two brands- one the original creation and the second- the knock off.
Makes you think- how do the expensive brands stay in business?! A famous designer said that he found after research that the counterfeit customer is not the high end designer. They are appealing to very different demographic. There is status, brand, titles. Therefore, the copy designer is not taking anything (in terms of customers) from the high-end brand. Because of this, the higher-end become more innovative and different making it harder to copy.
Overall, this was incredibly interesting. I have never thought about it but I often see "cheaper" versions of clothing, accessories, etc. When I go shopping next I will see and compare the different items and see how innovative each item actually is.
Welcome back to my blog post. So far, I am really enjoying looking up these silly patents. There are many patented technologies or ideas that I would never think would have been patented. For this post I focused on patents of items or technologies that I never knew existed. This was a great way for me to not only learn why these patents were silly but also learn about new items that I never knew were even thought about! Hope you enjoy, and I am looking forward to reading your comments!
Patent 6929164 | Neck Wrap/Brace Organizer
The idea of this product is a neck wrap that holds items and a belt article that also carry things similar to the neck wrap as it is wrapped around the neck of a person. The idea is that the neck wrap secures together at opposite ends around the person's neck. On the neck strap, there are special features like a telephone holder, which enables the person to use the telephone in a hands-free manner. The belt article has a belt strap that tightens around the person's waist.
A medical neck brace similar to the neck wrap
The idea behind this patent is that is allows you to "de-cluttered" the your life. However, there are a few reasons why I believe that this is a silly patent. First, I do not think that this is a very valid invention. Not only is it not fashionable, but I am not sure how socially acceptable it is. A lot of time a neck brace like the one shown in the picture is generally associated with injury. Therefore, I am not sure how practical this is as an item. Second, like I previously stated, the jump to add a few loops to a traditional medical neck brace is not that far of a difference from the neck wrap shown here. For that reason, I am not sure how non-obvious this product is, and in fact I think it is a very obvious and non-novel invention. I do not believe that this should have been patented. However, I am curious to see what you all think- and mostly would you wear one of these around campus? I do agree that it could potentially make life easier but I am pretty confident I would not wear one of these!
Patent D493601 | Edible Business Cards
This product is fairly straight forward. They are business cards that are edible. I definitely did not know that this product existed. They are made out of a chocolate base and then they have edible colorful ink outlining the details. However, the practicality of these cards are in question since it seems counter intuitive. The purpose of business cards are to give people information and so they can keep your information and get in contact with one another. However, if the card is edible then they are going to eat it and the information will be lost. Therefore, I would not use edible business cards, although it seems to be a fun idea.
Additionally, the edible business card is just a version of the regular business card- there is clearly prior art in this situation so it is not novel that there are edible business cards.
Overall, I found these inventions to be very interesting because I did not know that these inventions were in existence. However, at the same time, once I learned about them, they did not seem non-obvious in any way. Hope you enjoy this post- looking forward to your thoughts and comments!
This week the professor asked us to search silly and crazy patents and analyzing why they are considered silly! I have looked up two patents that are very interesting to me mainly because the concepts seems so simply and obvious. I am even surprised that the Patent office approved these patents. Let me know what you guys think!
Patent 5443036 | Method of exercising a cat
The first patent I want to focus on is patent 5443036, which was a patent that detailed how to exercise a cat. Essentially this patent was a method for inducing cats to exercise which mainly consisted of directing a beam of light (a laser light) from a held hand device onto the floor and wall. Additionally, the patent detailed moving the laser so to cause an irregular way of fascinating cats and other animals who case on instinct. I believe that this is a silly patent because the idea of this was probably long thought of before making the idea not novel. There was actually a book "One Hundred and Eighty-Seven Ways to Amuse a Bored Cat" that entail the exact same idea but using a flashlight. Although this patent has a slight variation, it is still an obvious switch to using a laser instead of flashlight. Therefore, the patent should have never been issued but it was pointed out that United States Patent and Trademark Office has actually issued the same patent or similar patents multiple times.
Patent 6368227 | Method of swinging on a swing
The priority date on this patent is November 17th, 2000. Essentially this patent details the way that the user would be positioned on the swing. It says that a user would be positioned on a standard swing suspended by two chains from horizontal tree branch and has a side to side motion by alternately pulling on one chain and then the other.
On the technical side of this patent, it says that the method of swinging on a swing is the technical part. However, the concept of a swing has been around for generations. Although this swing is placed on a tree branch, it in no way is novel from a regular swing set or non-obvious in any regard. Therefore, it is just a variation of a past invention, and in my mind should not have been patented. Additionally, it is clear there is prior art for this invention which again, does not make sense as to why it was patented. Another thing to think about is that any person can make a swing on a tree branch- therefore, would the people who patented this invention charge a royalty every time someone made this swing? It is a pretty funny invention since they have had swings around for a good amount of time now.
Thank you for reading my blog post. I look forward to reading your comments!
This week, we were asked to continue to research NPEs. In my last two blog posts, I discussed what NPEs were and the controversy surrounding these entities. In my second blog post for assignment #8, I gave a quick example of a case between a NPE and a practicing entity.This week, I wanted to look at NPEs from another perspective- I felt that I would be able to do this by researching one of the most well-known NPEs.
Understanding Intellectual Ventures
Intellectual Ventures, a well known patent troll, is one of the largest NPEs and according to many articles, the most hated company in tech.
To begin, Intellectual Ventures was founded in 2000 by Microsoft employees Nathan Myhrvold and Edward Jung. Intellectual Ventures has collected close to 70,00 “intellectual assets” on a variety of different technologies and has control on over 40,000 of the 70,000 “intellectual assets”.
In the past, Intellectual Ventures has taken a lot of heat. They have been compared to the Mafia in the tech world who demand money and hinder development and growth in this industry. Needless to say, it is clear that Intellectual Ventures is one of the world’s biggest patent trolls.
Really Understanding Intellectual Ventures
The paragraphs above explain what most people think about Intellectual Ventures. However, after doing some research, I have learned what Intellectual Ventures thinks of itself.
The company actually functions in two parts. The first part is a think tank, where people come up with the most insane and innovative ideas to fix the world’s problems. The think tank part of Intellectual Ventures (also known as the fun side) has spun off into two businesses. First, TerraPower (a company building new, cleaner nuclear reactor) and Kymeta (produces antennas that improve satellite connections). The fun side of the business shows the brilliance and intelligence of their employees.
The other side of the business, is in fact, the troll business. The aggressive, assertive and lawyer-driven organization looking to make money from the insane amount of patents that it owns. This is the part that receives the criticism, but without it, the groundbreaking innovations that occur at Intellectual Ventures would not be taking place.
Myhrvold and their employees understand their negative public image, however, they believe that inventors need their fair share- people should get paid for their work. Myhrvold even said that “inventors should get rich. We should have more inventors, It’s good for everybody”. It makes sense that if you are using the technology that someone else invented, you should get paid for it. Personally, this seems very logically, however, when explained from the other viewpoint, I understand the feelings of anger others must experience.
Why do people hate Intellectual Ventures?
If the above is true, it doesn’t make sense why everyone has such strong, negative feelings towards Intellectual Ventures.
Intellectual Ventures has the most patents than any company in the United States. However, because they have so many patents, the only way to pay them off would be to engage in aggressive troll like behavior. They license to companies like SAP, Samsung and HTC.
Since Intellectual Ventures is a NPE, they have advantages in the courtroom since they are not as vulnerable. Additionally, these companies are built for litigation and they are not afraid of the costs. NPE do not even have an discovery costs because they do not even have any products. For this, people believe the patent system favor NPEs. People feel like NPEs have nothing to loose.
Furthermore, in a study done in 2011, it was not just large corporate companies getting sued. The median company being sued had only $10.8 million in revenue. Any sort of patent litigation to a startup could be deadly since they do not have the funds for the actual ligation let alone the settlement.
Although this seems unfair- it is not only NPEs suing companies for patent infringement. Apple, Google, Facebook and other companies spend millions to acquire patents just as a defensive mechanism (you sue me, I’ll sue you).
This leads to the question, why does everyone hate Intellectual Ventures so much! The company’s executives think that they are just misunderstood.
While they have the potential to tear down small or large companies, and are built for litigation- they are focused on helping inventors and creating new inventions. Other companies that are not NPEs may participate in similar behavior, however, the negative stereotypes around NPEs leave Intellectual Ventures with a misunderstood public image. However, the employees seem to understand their mission to continue to create and innovate.
Defending Intellectual Ventures
While it is understandable why companies may hate Intellectual Ventures (since they have so many patents) they actually create some of their patents in house.
They have intense brainstorming sessions where they spend hours coming up with solutions to some of today's most pressing issues along with issues that others have not even discovered yet. The company has come up with 500 patents and 4,000 patent applications and averages around 30 new patents per month. So although people may think they just take others ideas (which they do use other inventors patents) to then bully them, they are actually creating many new innovations- they are just not producing them.
Conclusion
Overall, I found this closer look into Intellectual Ventures very interesting! Although my personal view is still on the fence, this gave me a much broader understanding of NPEs. It shined a more positive light on NPEs where before, I only saw them negatively. I hope that you enjoy this post, and I am looking forward to reading your comments! Thanks :)
For my second blog post, I wanted to take a closer look into NPE's and their reputation. I was able to research them more to find out the controversy that surrounds these entities! Hope you enjoy this blog post. Looking forward to reading your comments and advice!
To begin, there is a lot of controversy behind non-practicing entities. Are they aggressively breaking down others or are they helping inventors get their fair share? This is a difficult question and it depends on who you are asking. Therefore, its understandable why there is so much controversy surrounding these entities.
Here are some reasons why there is a lot of controversy surrounding NPEs.
The main critics will argue that non-practicing entities could potentially misuse the patent system and as a result demotivate innovation by true innovators
Non-practicing entities are seen as companies that essentially diminish competition within the market (which in the long-run could potentially hinder development and growth of products, because without competition, there is less need to constantly improve products). Because they have the patents but do not create the inventions, they diminish competition which can also cause prices to rise.
Although NPEs may claim that they want inventors to receive their fair share, often times, the individual inventors are paid very small amounts in comparison to the NPEs, who earn huge settlements or licensing deals.
Non-practicing entities do not act like actual businesses or true competitors because they do not produce any sort of product or service. Because of this, it is seen that they have unfair trade practices.
Defendants in cases against NPEs cannot counter claim meaning that NPEs are immune to infringement claim or counter claims.
The most common lawsuit that involves a non-practicing entity usually involves a settlement. In fact, 9 out of 10 lawsuits involving NPEs end in a settlement, making critics believe that this is just a money making scheme.
Because of NPEs position (in which they own the patent but do not actually produce any product or service), they are the best positioned for the lawsuits they instigate and are able to extract huge amount of money from the alleged infringers. Additionally, due to the high cost and risk, the infringers are always more inclined to settle.
NPEs are seen as not adding as much value as practicing entities because they are not involved in promoting innovation and new products. They are only focused on protecting patent from others.
As you can see, there are many reasons why NPEs could be controversial. However, often times, NPEs cause many negative impacts. In fact, when NPEs accuse a company of patent infringement it negatively affects the value of the company greatly. Additionally, many times the companies NPEs are suing, do not have sufficient funds and are forced to settle. It is understandable then why there is a negative stigma around NPEs.
An example of a NPE lawsuit is the case between NTP, Inc and Research in Motion (also known as RIM). Essentially, NTP (the non-practicing enterprise) implemented patent infringement suit against RIM which resulted in a settlement of $612.5 million for NTP. However, in this case, some doubts were brought up about the validity of NTP’s patents. There was a review of their questionable patents which led to invalidating some of their patents. Unfortunately, before this took place, NTP and RIM settled their lawsuit in a settlement. RIM agreed to the settlement mainly because their was pressure from its investors and customers who was worried about RIM’s ability to continue its wireless services.
Above is an example of the influence NPEs can have in the industry. Even though the patents validity was questioned, NTP still received a huge amount of money.
Overall, I found this issue to be very interesting- what do you all think? Do you believe NPEs can be beneficial? Would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks for reading!
Hope you all had a great spring break! For assignment #8 we were asked to look into Patent trolls. For my first blog post, I want to take a closer look and define what NPEs and patent trolls are to build a good foundation. Hope you enjoy!
What is a non-practicing entity?
A non-practiciting entity is any entity that makes the majority of its revenue from the enforcement or licensing of its patents. A non-practicing entity does not sell any sort of product or service, besides the licensing of their patents. However, because they do not infringe on the patent rights in other patent portfolios, they are immune to counter assertion (a differing point of view that deals more with an idea or belief, not always backed up by fact). They can be individual inventors, universities and both small and large patent aggregators. The reason they are called patent trolls tend to be because their only purpose is to grab patents and use them against companies that manufacture similar products. Generally, patent troll has a negative connotation attached to it.
What are the main function of the NPE?
The main function of the non-practicing entity are as follows:
NPE has patents but do not produce the product of service based on the patent
Buy patents from one company to sue other companies (by saying that their patent is being infringed)
Implements patent rights through licenses or litigation
Main objective to implement patent rights using the actual patents themselves
What types of NPEs are there?
Additionally, there are also many different types of Non-patent entities. The first type is often inventors who do not want to be involved in the development, manufacturing or the sales of their inventions. This may be because they do not have the resources or the interest so instead they set out to license their inventions to others who have the ability to produce the product of service. Other times, they can choose to just sell the patents outright completely to not be involved in the process what so ever.
Other types of NPE’s may be companies whose sole purpose is to license patents aggressively. Some companies may acquire patents and aggressively license them to others while other companies use their own patents to license. However, regardless, non-patent entities present a different type of perspective and challenge than traditional operating company patent assertions.
What is the difference between NPEs and Practicing Entities?
A non- practicing entity and a practicing entity both have patent ownership, but it is only the practicing entity that actually sells the product or service. NPEs, like explained above, acquire patents with the purpose of enforcing the patents against the practicing entities. Typically, practicing entities get their patents through research and development whereas NPEs get their patents from inventors and other companies who no longer want or need them.
Hope this gave you a better understanding of this topic. Thanks for reading! :)
Check out this video in regards to obviousness! Feel free to read my summary below to get a quick overview of the video! Thanks.
How different is your idea?
Two different requirements, you invention must be novel, but the second requirement is a little trickier, that your invention has to be non-obvious. Today we will only focus on the non-obvious portion.
Non-obvious means that whatever is different from your invention from what other people have done before, can't be something which is just an obvious leap or forward progression from prior models or inventions. It has to be something where there is more unexpectedness to it. So even if your invention is novel, and there is nothing exactly like it, there also needs to be a difference. Your invention must be non-obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the field of your invention.
There needs to be enough of a difference- so a person in the field cannot say "oh yes, that is something I would have easily imagined together".
Example
Say for instance you want to take clothes hangers and making them in smaller sizes for children's clothing. Yes, this may be novel because no one has done this before. However, it is the type of thing for people who manufacture clothes hangers know that they can make a hanger in any size. They just chose a particular size to standardize it. Therefore, changing the size of a clothes hanger would be obvious and non-patentable.
Why can this be confusing?
Sometimes, it can come down to a matter of opinion if something is obvious or not. Patent Attorneys often advise inventors about whether their inventions can pass the non-obviousness requirement of the Patent Office beforehand. This can get confusing for the average person. In order to really make this determination, you must identify and understand the closest things to your invention (also known as prior art) before you can determine if your invention is non-obvious.
That is all! I thought that this was a very clear and concise breakdown of obviousness. Hope you all enjoyed.
Back again! This week we were asked to look at obviousness in-depth. For this post, I decided to reevaluate the definition of obviousness.
After reviewing the professor's lecture slides, it is clear that non-obvious means that a "person having ordinary skills in the art wouldn't have thought of it given the plurality of prior art." Essentially stating that the idea or concept is not common knowledge or obvious to a regular person who is not an expert in the subject matter. An interesting example given in the lecture, was the idea of a glow in the dark tooth brush. This could be rejected for the reasons that it stems off of the prior art of both the glow stick and the toothbrush. However, it could also be argued that these two items come from incredibly different fields and someone who designed a toothbrush would be unlikely to combine these two items, making it a less obvious invention. In the lecture slides, the Professor also went into a real world case (the one that set the precedent for obviousness), which I found to be very helpful.
After researching obviousness a little more, here is what I found. Obviousness really is the center and heart of the United States patent system. It is a main requirement that every inventor or designer must overcome in order to convince the Patent Office that the invention is worthy of a patent in the first place. From the perspective of an infringer, obviousness is the best chance to invalidate a patent. However, it is also important that whoever submits the patent first gets priority over it.
The Patent Act of 1952 says that a patent claim must be obvious when "the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art." In conclusion, essentially, in order for something to pass the obviousness requirement, ordinary people with ordinary skills could have not thought of the invention or idea. Although this seems fairly straight forward, I believe it is still a very complex concept since each situation must be dealt with on a case by case basis.
For this post, I will be discussing my personal view related to the anticipation and obviousness of these patents. Overall, I will be discussing the issues related to the invalidity, priority date, anticipation and obviousness.
Before we start, I think it is important to define anticipation and obviousness (as learned in class).
When we are talking about obviousness in regards to patents, an invention will only be patented if it is not obvious or trivial. If it is either of those things then the patent will not be issued. In order to be patented, it must be non-obvious, meaning that someone who is an expert in that field can say if the invention is innovative and expands and deviates from pervious inventions. Therefore, if there are little or insignificant differences between one product and the next, it will prevent it from being patented.
In regards to anticipation, it means that the patent and the innovation must be novel. If others know about the item or technology you are trying to patent, then the patent has the potential to be denied.
While I was reading the different patents on the sleeves of coffee cups, I did not realize the amount of innovation that takes place. It was super interesting to see the development and transition of these sleeves from the mid 1900's to today.
I feel like the air gaps discussed in the first patent I looked at were non-obvious. Someone who did not study insulation would have not thought to create air gaps to overall increase insulation. These air gaps overall increase the efficiency of insulation. However, it is important to note that as there became more sleeve inventions, there seemed to only be minor changes to the sleeve involving air gaps. Some may argue that there is no anticipation because people already know about it, but I feel that is it still useful because it made a significant impact.
In regards to the thermal coffee cup, we have seen this used mostly everywhere. The initial drawings of the cup have changed over time but the increased portability that this patent and invention provided at the time were very novel. Another patent was the glue on dot adhesives and syntactic foam- again I believe that this satisfies as non-obvious since someone with a more technical background would have some sort of knowledge in the best way to construct these sleeves.
Lastly, the patent I found to be most interesting was the temperature indication sleeve. I believe that this is the most novel and non-obvious of all of the patens we looked at. The only thing is that there many be some difficulty in cost and that it is so disposable. However, I am curious to see how this plays out in the future. Overall, most of these patents make sense- some make rather small improvements than others but all seem to serve a new, innovative valuable purpose. Thanks for reading!
Hello, In my first blog post for this week, I will be telling the story of these patents and the patent applications. I will be going over nine patents and patent applications, and discussing their background, priority date, technology, diagrams and the claims. Tables of Contents (with patent # included)
US 6343735 B1 Insulating sleeve
US 2661889 A Thermal coffee cup
US 8,251,277 B1 Thermal sleeve, method for
manufacturing a thermal sleeve, and combination cup and thermal sleeve
US 7,922,031 B1 Insulator sleeve for a beverage container
US 8118189 B1 Temperature-indicating sleeve and related container
US 6152363 Sleeve construction for improved paperboard cup insulation
US 20080078824 A1 Beverage cup sleeving system and method
US 20100019023 A1 Protective sleeve
US 20140151385 A1 Hot and Cold Cup Sleeve
PATENT 1
US 6343735 B1 Insulating sleeve
Priority Date: May 4th, 2000
Improved sleeve that protect user's hand from hot beverages. Before coffee was made in foamed plastic containers which were very insulative- however, foamed plastic has become unfavorable over the last few years for environmental reasons. Some insulation can be provided when "double cupping" but this essentially just wastes many cups. Therefore, this patent is both economical, and it encourages people to spend less on cups, and environmentally friendly. It is an insulated sleeve that has ridges that allow for gripping- these ridges turn into air pockets that the user does not need to see which overall improves the insulations of this sleeve. This specific sleeve also included two wing portions that extend beyond the container to form air gaps (discussed previously) between the wings and the cup.Two key specifications is that there are ridges that run from top to bottom and from top to the middle of the sleeve. Overall it has a thin paperboard material, two folded sections and air gaps.
PATENT 2 US 2661889 A Thermal coffee cup
Priority Date: July 20th, 1948
A container that was designed to allow user's to hold a hot beverage in their hand without it hurting them in any way. The first concept of insulating from hot beverages. Also can be used with a lid for added portability. This container has an outer frusto conical shaped sleeve and an inner corrugated lining making up the inner and the outer layer. The diagram shows the cup and the lid, which has an opening on it. PATENT 3 US 8,251,277 B1 Thermal sleeve, method for manufacturing a thermal sleeve, and combination cup and thermal sleeve
Priority Date: April 15th, 2005
A thermal sleeve can be used to provide thermal insulation from hot beverages. It can be used with cups and protect the users from injury or discomfort associated with hot liquids. Sleeves help replace traditional coffee mugs and make mugs more portable. The cup sleeves are made out of paper product- that is held together by adhesive. More specifically, the outer layer of the paper has 7 to 100 creases and the inner smoother layer is brought together by adhesive. The figures illustrate a thermal sleeve wrapping around the cup, and how it can be packed into various groups. The claims talk about the specific paper product they use and how it protects the entire cup. PATENT 4 US 7,922,031 B1 Insulator sleeve for a beverage container
Priority Date: March 1st, 2007
This is an insulating sleeve for a beverage cup which is sold in big coffee establishments. You can customize your sleeve as well. Because coffee establishments like Starbucks became more popular, there was a need for a way to protect people's hand. Many different models of the insulating sleeve have been created to eliminate the need for ceramic mugs or for double cupping one's coffee. The sleeve that was created had both an inner and outer layer. Additionally in this patent, it is stated that part of the outer sleeve is translucent and can be made with any material, like clear vinyl or rubber that protects the hand. In the diagrams, we see both the inner and outer portion of the sleeve, the type of material and texture they use. In the claims, they describe the sleeve in more detail talking about the feature of being able to write on the outside of the cup. PATENT 5 US 8118189 B1 Temperature-indicating sleeve and related container
Priority Date: December 15th, 2006
This is a temperature indicating sleeve that is able to be placed around the outer surface of a container. When people purchase hot coffee or drinks, the cups tend to be slightly insulated giving customers an inaccurate read on how hot the beverage actually is, unless they decide to try it. This inventions is a sleeve that shows how hot the beverage is. It would use a thermally insulating material that allows the easy transmission of heat to determine the temperature. In the figures, it shows how to implement the temperature indicator. The claims talk about how this sleeve has a visibly observable temperature indicator with a temperature scale. PATENT 6 US 6152363 Sleeve construction for improved paperboard cup insulation
Priority Date: May 3rd, 1999
This is a sleeve specifically related to paperboard cups. It uses the air gaps previously discussed to insulate against heat. This sleeve is supposed to insulate and be able to have graphics on the sleeve. The sleeve construction has a smooth paper sleeve with a predetermined length and height with air gaps. Additionally, the air gaps have little dots of hot glue and foam. The figures show how to construct the sleeve from a front angle, and the claim talks about what materials to use and the dimensions of each sleeve. PATENT 7 US 20080078824 A1 Beverage cup sleeving system and method
Priority Date: August 23rd, 2007
A lot of different establishments use portable cups that need sleeves for both hot and cold beverages. However, if a sleeve gets wet, it essentially becomes useless. The technology behind it would be to create a sleeve that it has two layers that use silicone, rubber for insulation. The patent also mentions that there is velcro involved which is shown in the figures. PATENT 8 US 20100019023 A1 Protective sleeve
Priority Date: July 25th, 2008
This is a protective sleeve that ultimately reduces environmental waste. When beverages both hot and cold are dispensed into drinking cups that may be paper, plastic or foam, they often times do not provide the correct amount of insulation. This will lead to an uncomfortable experience for the consumer. The technology behind this is to create a paperboard that is biodegradable and can be manipulated to be flat. This builds off of other inventions in the past, improving on old concepts. The diagrams show a sleeve placed on a cup that is flat. The claims state that it will be used for a container with an arch like shape. PATENT 9 US 20140151385 A1 Hot and Cold Cup Sleeve
Priority Date: February 6th, 2014
A sleeve is used for both hot and cold beverage cups and that is glued together, lightweight and disposable. It has a total of three layers which helps the cup from falling apart. This is a really effective sleeve for hot drinks. It has a water-absorbent lining and a water repellent outer layer- and a special coating on polyethylene. The diagrams show a three dimensional view of the sleeve and a front view and assembly of the sleeve. The claims show that it has a water absorbent lining, and elaborates on the specific measurements.
Thanks for reading!
In claim #1, for the "slide to unlock" patent, it essentially describes the general process of how the concept works for the screen. It explains the method of physically unlocking a hand-held device through the touch screen display. There are multiple steps that claim #1 walks you through to ensure the process is clearly outlined so there are no discrepancies. It states that you must touch the image and then drag it to ultimately unlock by keeping contact on the phone screen. Additionally, it notes that you must stay in contact with the image to unlock it before letting go.
Overall, the claim seems very specific. It goes into great detail that actual process an individual must perform. While it is very specific, it is also very informative and gives the reader a very great picture of the actual process. If you were unfamiliar with this technology it is like an instruction manual on how to open the phone lock. Because of this very clear outline, it is clear if any other company tried to use this patented technology that it would be in violation of this patent.
Quick Summary:
Three main actions to take for this patent
Contact-point where the user should slide
The interface responds, so user knows it is working
Today, I will be discussing the top 10 incorrect predictions throughout history. The first 5 incorrect predictions, I have chosen from the powerpoint the professor gave us. The next 5 are incorrect predications that I found on the internet.
Predictions from Professors Powerpoint
"X-rays will prove to be a hoax." -Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1883
Lord Kelvin did not have faith in modern medicine in the 1800's to understand how integral this technology would be in transforming medicine. X-rays provide one of the most accurate pictures of the human body for doctors to adequately understand their patients. Without x-rays, doctors would not have nearly as comprehensive of understandings on how to treat their patients. X-rays today, have a wide range of medical applications and are essential in treating most patients. X-rays can help confirm the presence or absence of a disease or injury- and are painless, non-invasive, and do not require any special preparation or recovery time.
"The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a novelty- a fad" -The president of the Michigan Savings Bank advising Henry Ford's lawyer not to invest in the Ford Motor company, 1903
It is clear that deciding not to invest was the wrong decision that day. In 2013, 15.6 million motor vehicles were sold- proving that the automobile was not just a fad. After driving on the I-580 at 5:00 PM, it is hard to imagine a world without cars, as you sit there bumper to bumper, staring at what seems to be an infinite number of cars ahead of you. The president clearly undersold the idea of the automobiles and the mass success they would have in the future. Automobiles were not just a fad, they completely replaced the concept of using livestock as transportation completely. Animals were costly and much more time consuming as you needed to care and nurture the animal. A car on the other hand is dependable.
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home" -Ken Olson, president, chairman, and founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, in a talk given to a 1977 world future society meeting in Boston.
Ken clearly did not see the potential in individuals having computers. It is most likely because he could not possible imagine the vast amount of information that would readily available through the internet and the computer. It is also ironic since he is the president and founder of a company that was a major player in the computer industry in the 1960's. In fact, over 75% of households in 2011 had computers in there homes and the numbers continue to increase throughout the years, making this one of the most false predictions of its time.
"A rocket will never be able to leave Earth's atmosphere." -New York Times, 1936
This prediction is completely inaccurate because in 1969, Neil Armstrong stepped foot on the moon. Since then, there have been multiple excursions to outer space. Some have involved people exploring other planets while sometimes we just send machinery to outer space. However, at the end of the day, this predication was completely wrong since people and machinery have been to outer space. Companies like Space X for instance are starting and trying to colonize Mars. This quote is now very misstated as our society continues to progress.
"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." -Decca recording company on declining to sign the Beatles, 1962
Decca must really regret their decision to not sign one of the most famous bands of all time. The Beatles gained 17 number one hits and sold 1.89 million copies of "She Loves You". To date, the Beatles have sold over 1 billion records and have recorded four of the top 10 greatest albums of all time, according to Rolling Stone magazine. Needless to say, the Beatles are legends and will go down in history as one of the greatest groups of all time.
Predictions from the Internet
"The cinema is little more than a fad. It's canned drama. What audiences really want to see is flesh and blood on the stage." -Charlie Chaplin, actor, producer, director and studio founder, 1916
A singular movie has generated $3.4 billion in revenue. It is safe to make the assumption that movies have outperformed live plays over and over again. Additionally, we are seeing the trend of people watching movies and home or on their personal devices like laptops and tablets. Every year, fewer people attend live plays as TV shows and movies on the internet are much more accessible and convenient for our generation- mostly due to advances in our technological devices.
"The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys." -Sir William Preece, Chief Engineer, British Post Office, 1878
In 1878, the first telephone line was constructed. By the 1900's almost 600,000 phones were in the Bell's telephone system- this number skyrocketed to 2.2 million by 1905, and 5.8 million by 1910. In 1915 the transcontinental telephone line was operating. The invention of the telephone quickly and aggressively took out all other types of messaging services because nothing could compete with the effectiveness and efficiency that the telephone provided. Sir William Preece may have thought this at the time, but it is clear this invention revolutionized communication.
"Three hour shifts or a fifteen-hour work week" -John Maynard Keynes, 1930
John Maynard Keynes claimed that by now, our society would only need to work fifteen hour weeks. While I believe many wish this was true, his prediction is sadly, very far off from our society's current state. Although the average work week of hours has decrease over time, most people still tend to abide by the forty hour work week.
"I must confess that my imagination refuses to see any sort of submarine doing anything but suffocating its crew and floundering at sea" -H.G. Wells
Submarines today are used to perform specialized and difficult expeditions and military operations. They are also virtually undetectable and can be very useful crafts in any war. In a submarine you are hidden and do not run the risk of being attacked. There is a variety of different functions that a submarine can perform that have been very useful to our military for many years- making them useful, not useless.
"Two years from now, spam will be solved" -Bill Gates, 2004
Although Bill Gates is a genius, one thing he was wrong about is getting spam. I get about 17 spam emails every single day in my spam folder in my gmail account. Although there has been a slight solution to the problem (i.e. spam folder), the issue of "spam" is not completed solved, and may never be. Since it is 2015 and spam is still around, I am not confident that this issue will disappear. Additionally, and more importantly, I do not think spam is the most pressing issue at the time, and that may be why it is taking so long to permanently get rid of spam.
This week I took a look at all of your blogs and have created a new list of the top ten inventions of all time. First of all, everyone had really interesting criteria before choosing their top ten. This week instead of solely looking at how each invention affected the well-being of society, I will also consider which inventions made the biggest impact and which inventions led or will lead to many more inventions after their inception. Some of my top ten inventions are the same because I still feel like they are some of the greatest inventions of all time, however, there is a fair share of new inventions that made it into my top ten.
New Inventions
X-ray Technologies in Medicine
After reading many posts, it is clear that this technology provide very valuable information about the body- including information about skeletal, muscular and tissue-level images. This technology helps doctors determine people's illnesses more accurately allowing them to provide better treatment. Being able to take pictures of a body, allows doctors to diagnose patients and recommend appropriate action plans, therefore helping the overall well- being of society and individuals. Although we have not seen the technology that can be propelled from this invention, I am sure that it will be revolutionary.
Camera
The camera is a way to capture history more accurately than we have ever been able to do before. Like the say, a picture says a thousand words. Instead of reading written accounts of historical events like we do now, in the future, people will be able to look back on photos to understand our culture, experiences and particularly special moments. The camera has also expanded and is now implemented in most technical devices like cell phones and laptops. Its expansion encourages capturing moments. Beside that, cameras also have helped with increased security by capturing crimes or robberies in action.
Printing Press
The printing press is so important because it helped begin the transferring of knowledge. Printing allowed people to spread the word about monumental moments- and information that was not screened by the church. It ensured that everyone heard the same story from the same source and nothing was altered or manipulated. The availability of printed materials also led to a drastic rise in the adult literacy rate which improved the overall well being of society.
Plumbing
The invention of a effective plumbing system is incredibly important. Although we have had many medical innovations that have saved millions of lives, it is also important that our sewage system was innovated since people now live in such close quarters. When people live very close together, it is easy for disease to spread, especially if living in bacteria. Because of this invention, we do not have infectious cities and have clean and purified water which is essential for humans to live.
Control of Fire
The invention of the stove or the fire place are incredibly vital to society's current existence. Being able to control fire in this setting has allowed us to cook and sterilize food and water easier and also has allowed us to keep warm during harsh weather seasons. This is something most people overlook, but without heat, humans would be left to overcome many more obstacles.
Automobile
The automobile introduced a new way of living. It encouraged and allowed people to commute into work changing the dynamic of cities and creating suburbs. Now, the over population in cities, was not as large of an issue as people began to move further away and only come in during work. It created privatized transportation and encouraged people to move to urban areas. It also increased productivity because there was no time wasted feeding livestock that normally transported humans from place to place.
Microwave
The microwave, which was accidentally discovered, overall increased productivity drastically by allowing people to make their food much quicker. Because humans need food to survive, the less time consuming you make the process for people to sustain themselves with foods, gives them more time to explore other arenas and create new inventions.
Old Inventions
The Plow
The plow is a simple cutting tool that is used to prepare soil for planting. Although this invention is not glamorous in anyway, it was an invention that led to a lot of other great products and machinery. Before the plow, human’s lives were solely focused on the purpose of finding, nurturing and growing food in order to ensure their survival. Being able to grow food gave them some stability, however, it was incredibly time and labor intensive. However, the plow was able to change all of that. Plows made this process a lot easier and allowed people to produce more food than they needed to survive. They could then trade their excess food for other goods and services with this invention. The plow also allowed society to focus on other activities instead of just focusing on how to survive. In regards to the plow being the catalyst to other inventions- since people were able to devote more time trading and interacting with others, this forced a number system, written language, etc.
Wheel
The wheel was invented in 3500 BC and sparked many different industries by making transportation much more efficient and effective. Both agriculture and commerce were made readily available to others due to easier transportation. However, if the wheel was only used for transportation, it wouldn't have altered the world as drastically as it has. Because there were very few roads and the quality of them were very poor, the potential of the wheel was actually limited for a great period of time. A wheel has many different uses- so many other inventions require wheels in order to function. A lot of modern technology also depends on the basic wheel, making it one of the most influential innovations of all time.
Compass
The compass is dated back to AD 1040-44. The compass is so vital because it is the foundation of all navigation based inventions since its inception. It was originally a magnetic needle floating in a bowl of water which was widely used throughout China. The dry compass, also created in China, was later adopted by Europe and Japan, and allowed them to discover great lands that altered history.
*Just a note, I could not figure out how to continue the numbering, if anyone knows how to, let me know! But there are 10 inventions total. Seven new inventions added to my list, and I kept three old inventions! Thanks!
Hi everyone! Welcome back to my blog! I am really excited to be
talking about which inventions I believe to be the Top 10 inventions of all
time. When choosing which inventions to focus on, I picked inventions that
essentially improved the overall well being of society (from my point of view).
I have listed them in a random order- hope you enjoy, and I am looking forward
to reading your comments.
The Plow
The plow is a simple cutting tool that is used to prepare soil for
planting. Although this invention is not glamorous in anyway, it was an
invention that led to a lot of other great products and machinery. Before the
plow, human’s lives were solely focused on the purpose of finding, nurturing
and growing food in order to ensure their survival. Being able to grow food gave them some
stability, however, it was incredibly time and labor intensive. However, the
plow was able to change all of that. Plows made this process a lot easier and
allowed people to produce more food than they needed to survive. They could
then trade their excess food for other goods and services with this invention.
The plow also allowed society to focus on other activities instead of just
focusing on how to survive. In regards to the plow being the catalyst to other
inventions- since people were able to devote more time trading and interacting
with others, this forced a number system, written language, etc.
Refrigeration
There is not a single
inventor of the refrigerator because the concept has been improved for over 200
years. Although refrigeration is taken advantage of by today’s society, it
actually has had a profound impact on society. The ability to keep food cold
for longer periods drastically changed the food industry and how food was
produced. Eating habits of people all over the world changed due to
refrigeration. Today, everyone has easy access to a variety of different products
like meats, and cheeses- and is able to purchase them at low costs (since we do
not have to pay for natural ice). Without refrigeration making food more
accessible, the supply would have not been able to keep up with the rapidly
growing population.
Penicillin
Many years ago, the average lifespan of humans was only around 20-30 years old. 30% of babies died less than a year after they were born and more than half of them passed away before they were ten years old. Needless to say, disease and sickness easily controlled the population. It was not until Pasteur and Koch finally discovered that all of these illnesses were coming from microbes. Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin, which is the first antibiotic that was very effective against a variety of different diseases. He knew that penicillin could kill bacteria and therefore destroy the very common diseases people passed away from. A team in Oxford created a method of purification that allowed them to mass produce this antibiotic, saving many lives during World War 2 and creating the foundation for antibiotics.
Compass
The compass is dated back to AD 1040-44. The compass is so vital because it is the foundation of all navigation based inventions since its inception. It was originally a magnetic needle floating in a bowl of water which was widely used throughout China. The dry compass, also created in China, was later adopted by Europe and Japan, and allowed them to discover great lands that altered history.
Wheel
The wheel was invented in 3500 BC and sparked many different industries by making transportation much more efficient and effective. Both agriculture and commerce were made readily available to others due to easier transportation. However, if the wheel was only used for transportation, it wouldn't have altered the world as drastically as it has. Because there were very few roads and the quality of them were very poor, the potential of the wheel was actually limited for a great period of time. A wheel has many different uses- so many other inventions require wheels in order to function. A lot of modern technology also depends on the basic wheel, making it one of the most influential innovations of all time.
Telephone
Development of the telephone has drastically increased flexibility and productivity. The telephone expanded on the concept of sending beeps through wires in Morse code to actually sending someone's voice over the copper wires. The invention of the basic telephone led to the invention of wirelessly transmitting voices, written messages, etc. The development with the telephone essentially shrank the world. Hundreds of years ago, it would take days, weeks or months to hear from one another. Now, we can experience monumental moments simultaneously all through a quick phone call. The telephone effectively provides more information within reach and altered how society interacts with each other.
Steam Engine
The Industrial Revolution was catalyzed by the steam engine. Thomas Newcomen's was the first to use the concept of steam to power machines in 1712. In 1769, James Watt refined the engine created by Newcomen by adding a separate condenser which essentially increased the steam engine's power and made it the most practical way to do work. Therefore, Watt is truly considered the inventor of the steam engine. The steam engine was such an important invention because it made the production of goods incredibly rapid, and could power trains and steamships that carried those goods across the world- again, making the world smaller and more interactive.
Light Bulb
When I heard the word "light bulb", I automatically think of Thomas Edison- however, there are many inventors that were working on similar ideas in the 1800's. Many believe that the lightbulb was so revolutionary because it allowed people to work longer hours or be in dark places. At the time the lightbulb was invented, they already had cheap gas lamps and other sources of light. However, the way the light bulb changed the world was through the infrastructure that was built in order to provide electricity to every person, home, business and institution in the world. Because of this, the world is filled with so many different power devices, and we are able to charge and plug them in literally anywhere- and we have the lightbulb that allowed us to do this!
Internet
The internet is such a revolutionary invention because it gives any human the power of information. Any person, any time, any where can access whatever information they need to know. The internet is such a powerful invention because it allows humans to be so much more efficient by sharing knowledge with each other. This new level of efficiency is also said to speed up the number of world changing inventions we are bound to see. However, there is some fear in the internet as it causes people to become isolated and lost in a superficial world.
Airplane
The Wright brothers invented the airplane and created their first successful prototype in 1903. Through many of the inventions listed, I have said that they have made the world smaller (figuratively speaking). The airplane allows us to continue to do the same thing. The airplane allows us to freely connect safely across giant distances between family and friends. Even as the internet helped grow virtual connectivity, the need for people to connect in person has also increased- with the airplane making everything possible. Airplanes revolutionized transportation.
