Exploring NPEs (Intellectual Ventures) | Week 8

Hi guys!

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 :)

Controversy surrounding NPEs | Week 7

Hi Again,

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.

1. The main critics will argue that non-practicing entities could potentially misuse the patent system and as a result demotivate innovation by true innovators 
2. 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.
3. 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. 
4. 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. 
5. Defendants in cases against NPEs cannot counter claim meaning that NPEs are immune to infringement claim or counter claims. 
6. 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. 
7. 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. 
8. 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! 

Understanding NPEs | Week 7

Hello everyone! 

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:

1. NPE has patents but do not produce the product of service based on the patent
2. Buy patents from one company to sue other companies (by saying that their patent is being infringed) 
3. Implements patent rights through licenses or litigation
4. 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! :) 

Video Post | Week 6

Hey guys!

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. 

Understanding Obviousness | Week 6

Hi guys!

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. 

Sleeve Patent Personal View | Week 5

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!

Insulated Sleeve Patents and Patent Applications | Week 5

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)

1. US 6343735 B1 Insulating sleeve
2. US 2661889 A  Thermal coffee cup
3. US 8,251,277 B1 Thermal sleeve, method for manufacturing a thermal sleeve, and combination cup and thermal sleeve
4. US 7,922,031 B1 Insulator sleeve for a beverage container
5. US 8118189 B1  Temperature-indicating sleeve and related container
6. US 6152363 Sleeve construction for improved paperboard cup insulation
7. US 20080078824 A1 Beverage cup sleeving system and method 
8. US 20100019023 A1  Protective sleeve
9. 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! 

Slide to Unlock Patent | Week 4

Back again!

Explanation of Claim #1

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

1.  Contact-point where the user should slide
2. The interface responds, so user knows it is working 
3. Sliding across the screen unlocks the device 

Incorrect Predictions | Week 4

Hi all!

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

1. "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. 
2.   "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. 
3. "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. 
4. "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. 
5. "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

1. "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. 
2. "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. 
3. "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. 
4. "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. 
5. "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. 

Top 10 Inventions Updated | Week 3

Hi again!

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

1. 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. 
2. 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. 
3. 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. 
4. 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. 
5. 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. 
6. 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. 
7. 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

1. 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.
2. 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. 
3. 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!