Google patents Project Glass design

16 May 2012 Last updated at 13:19 Images from the patents show different versions of the technology Search giant Google has patented the design of its augmented-reality glasses, known as Project Glass.

Three patents for a "wearable display device" with characteristics of the much-talked about futuristic glasses were submitted last autumn.

The patents reference such functions as displaying data in front of the wearer's eyes and playing audio.

In April, Google revealed details of its research into the glasses and showed a demo video of a prototype.

The patents show images of different versions of augmented reality glasses, some with lenses and some without.

Cyborg eye

Google is working on the project in its research lab, Google X.

The prototypes are currently being tested by the firm's executives, including Sergey Brin and Vic Gundotra.

The demo video showed science fiction-like glasses equipped with a microphone and partly transparent tiny screen right above the user's right eye.

The glasses are said to have many functions of a smartphone

Besides displaying information about the wearer's surroundings, the glasses were shown to be used to communicate with other people, browse the web, listen to music and also take photos.

Similar tech

There are other firms researching the augmented-reality eyewear.

For instance, Oakley is currently developing similar glasses targeted at athletes and other sportsmen and women.

A number of companies had attempted to pioneer the concept as well, but did not get very far because their versions required users to carry separate battery equipment, as analyst at Davies Murphy Group Europe told the BBC in an earlier interview.

"There are huge opportunities for tailored advertising with augmented reality systems - especially if they have in-built GPS location tracking," Chris Green said.

"The monetisation opportunities would be enormous - but there are still big issues involved with shrinking the technology and making the computer that receives and processes the data truly portable."

View the original article here

Read More

Apple patents touchscreen unlock

26 October 2011 Last updated at 13:58 GMT Apple will likely argue that Android's pattern unlock violates its patent. Apple has been granted a patent on unlocking a smartphone or tablet using a touchscreen gesture.

The application, which was filed in June 2009, covers a range of commonly used techniques including swiping and pattern entry.

As well as on the iPhone and iPad, such systems are built into Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows Phone 7.

The patent is likely to become another weapon in Apple's arsenal as it continues to sue rival manufacturers.

Devices using the Android operating system have been the focus of particularly aggressive litigation.

Apple co-founder Steve Jobs believed that the product was a rip-off of iOS and vowed to "destroy" it, according to his recently released biography.

To date, his firm has waged a largely proxy war, targeting companies such as Samsung and Motorola which use Google's software.

As a result, Samsung is currently banned from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany and Australia.

Samsung has launched a counter offensive, claiming Apple has infringed technology patents which it holds.

However, on Wednesday, an Italian court turned down Samsung's application for an interim injunction on sales of the iPhone 4S in that country.

Both sides are now expected to submit further evidence.

Broad patent

Apple's patent - US patent number 7657549 - states: "A device with a touch-sensitive display may be unlocked via gestures performed on the touch-sensitive display.

"The device is unlocked if contact with the display corresponds to a predefined gesture for unlocking the device."

Continue reading the main story

The performance of the predefined gesture with respect to the unlock image may include moving the unlock image to a predefined location and/or moving the unlock image along a predefined path.”

End Quote US Patent 7657549 The text of the patent is broad and would appear to cover a number of the technologies used by Google and Microsoft in their handheld devices.

However, that did not necessarily mean that Apple would be able to exert its will, according to Silas Brown, an intellectual property solicitor with London-based law firm Briffa.

"Often you will have situations where patents are argued through long and hard to get to registration, but when they are challenged there is a counter action to claim that the patent shouldn't have been granted."

Mr Brown explained that such patents could be invalidated for a number of reasons, including being too broad, too simple or "obvious" in the current technological context.

In Europe, software cannot be patented in its own right. But Apple may still have a case, according to Mr Brown, if the function of unlocking was shown to materially improve the performance of the hardware.

"[Apple's] argument would be more in that direction - that this is an invention which has an affect on hardware, for example security," he said.

Determining that, would likely mean more work for lawyers and specialist engineers.

"The question would go down to a technical analysis and people who are experienced and knowledgeable in respect of this particular type of technology," said Mr Brown.

View the original article here

Read More

Are patents good for you?

22 July 2011 Last updated at 15:42 GMT The Angry Birds game has had more than 300 million downloads Patents are supposed to be good for innovation, protecting an inventor from having their ideas ripped off by unscrupulous imitators.

The current battle between a number of software developers and an American firm called Lodsys seems to show patents can have a chilling effect on entrepreneurs.

The case has leaped into the headlines now that the Angry Birds maker Rovio has been targeted by Lodsys, a company based in Texas which says it owns a number of patented technologies.

What brought it to my attention was a conversation with a young British developer who is also facing a lawsuit.

My contact - who does not want to be named - is a one-man band who has had great success with an app for both the iPhone and Android platforms. But 10 days ago he received a bulky document through the post from Lodsys.

It accused him of using, without permission, a patent relating to in-app purchasing - something introduced by Apple recently - and warned him that unless he paid a licensing fee to Lodsys, he could end up in court.

He had become the latest in a long list of developers big and small to be drawn into a legal battle with a firm conveniently based near the East Texas court which has proved itself sympathetic to the rights of patent holders.

Now software is much harder to patent in Europe than in the United States, and it would appear unlikely that Lodsys would take this battle to the British courts.

Anxious

So you might have thought that the developer would have treated the letter as a cheeky attempt to extract money and thrown it in the bin.

But it left my contact worried and confused: "I've no experience in that area, I didn't really understand what it was about, and I don't want to go to the expense of hiring a patent lawyer."

One answer would be simply to withdraw his app from the Apple's United States App Store - but that's where the majority of its customers are.  

Apple exercises strict control over what can run on its platform and has blocked apps in the past

He has contacted Apple and Google who've both said they will be in touch.

Apple has already intervened in the wider case, writing to Lodsys to say it's licensed the technology in question itself and to lay off its developers.

"I suppose I could just pay out a few hundred dollars and hope it will go away," says the developer. "But if I do that, then I could be seen as an easy target for others."

So what exactly is Lodsys and what does it do?

From its website, it seems its business consists of acquiring patents and launching lawsuits - there is no evidence that it actually makes anything.

Read through one of its patents and you will be none the wiser as to what the invention involves - and why it deserves the protection of the courts. But of course I am not a patent lawyer.

Experts tell me the landscape is shifting in patent law, with the American courts less friendly to this kind of tactic while in Europe it has become slightly easier to patent computer-based innovations.

I emailed the chief executive of Lodsys, Mark Small, to try to have a conversation about these matters. He swiftly sent me a very polite reply:

"We have to respectfully decline. We made the decision not to do press interviews and apply our resources to licensing discussions."

But here is what I would want to have asked him. Is a system that appears to reward those who acquire patents and hire lawyers and punish those who simply try to make things really going to encourage innovation?

My contact is certainly not doing much innovating right now - he's too busy worrying about the threat of an expensive lawsuit.

View the original article here

Read More