Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

IBM Patents Putting Handprints On Laptops

Posted by kdawson on Tue May 20, 2008 01:32 PM
from the hands-off dept.
Patents IBM Portables Hardware
theodp writes "You can still leave your handprint in cement at Grauman's Chinese Theater. But as of Tuesday, you best not do the same on a laptop, lest you infringe on IBM's new patent for the Portable Computer with a Hand Impression, an 'invention' that Big Blue explains makes balancing the portable computer on a user's hand easier."
+ -
story

Related Stories

Submission: IBM Patents Putting Handprints on Laptops by theodp (442580)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

IBM Patents Putting Handprints On Laptops 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ivan256 (17499) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:35PM (#23479828)
    It's in "Your Rights Online", so clearly kdawson wants us to be outraged... Is it because he thinks the idea is dumb, or that the patent is dumb? It's hard to tell in this case, since it seems to be a reasonable idea, and a reasonable patent...

    • Re:I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Timothy Brownawell (627747) <tbrownaw@prjek.net> on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:52PM (#23480132) Journal

      it seems to be a reasonable idea, and a reasonable patent...
      Well, it depends on what effect patents are supposed to have. If you think they're supposed to encourage people to publish what they'd otherwise try to keep as trade secrets, then patenting something which is very obvious when inspected isn't reasonable. If you think they're supposed to let people hold progress hostage by recording their daydreams, it's very reasonable.

      • Re:I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by reebmmm (939463) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @02:52PM (#23481090)
        NOTE*

        publish what they'd otherwise try to keep as trade secrets

        Not everything that is patentable (or ought to be patentable) must also be trade secret. This is a perfect example (actually most any mechanical invention is a good example). Once it's sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc. it would lose any and all protection.

        Now, arguably, one of the purposes of patents is to encourage people to disclose EARLIER rather than later. Here, you probably see this disclosure before you've actually seen it sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc.

        obvious when inspected
        Just about EVERYTHING seems obvious once you see it. That's the whole reason why the patent law painstakingly tries to AVOID doing your above analysis.

        hold progress hostage by recording their daydreams

        I don't know what this means. Patents have been around for 200 years and progress hasn't slowed by anyone's account.

        Moreover, this is hardly a "daydream" which seems to imply fanciful idea. There's probably almost NOTHING stopping them from implementing it right now. There are probably lots of real estate agents, contractors, etc. that would love to have a laptop that they could hold and show when there is not a table nearby.

        Finally, nothing stopped someone from introducing this idea (without patent protection) before this patent. So as far as I can tell, to the extent this moves progress forward and giving other people ideas, the publication of the patent has done it's job.

        * Like a good slashdotter, I have not actually looked at the patent or RTFA.

        • Not everything that is patentable (or ought to be patentable) must also be trade secret. This is a perfect example (actually most any mechanical invention is a good example). Once it's sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc. it would lose any and all protection.

          The protection isn't (supposed to be) the point. The societal benefit received in exchange for the sacrifice of granting that protection is the point.

          Now, arguably, one of the purposes of patents is to encourage people to disclose EARLIER rather than later. Here, you probably see this disclosure before you've actually seen it sold, used, displayed, demoed, described, photograph, etc.

          But this is a much lesser disclosure, in that there are heavy restrictions on what you can do with it.

          Just about EVERYTHING seems obvious once you see it.

          So patents ONLY provide a benefit when the patented thing would otherwise never be invented (or at least not be invented for another several years).

        • Re:I don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by skarphace (812333) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @03:46PM (#23482122) Homepage

          I don't know what this means. Patents have been around for 200 years and progress hasn't slowed by anyone's account.
          How could you possibly know this? Industrialization is younger then 200 years and normal 'inventionalism'(yeah, I pulled that out of my butt) never really started until then. There were the occasionally blacksmiths but nothing really all that interesting.

          How could you possibly know that progress isn't moving slower because of patent law?

          I may even like to bring up the booming asian bootleg market. Their level of innovation is skyrocketing by leaping off of other people's patentable ideas and improving them. That alone may be a good argument that patents are not helping innovation.
        • Patents are supposed to promote progress, by imposing restrictions for a couple decades. This only makes sense if what's being restricted would have been restricted for longer/forever (trade secrets), or wouldn't have existed at all. Given that people like to invent things just for fun, and that there was plenty of innovation before patents were invented, I suspect that that second category is close to empty.

    • Re:I don't get it... (Score:5, Funny)

      by dreamchaser (49529) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:53PM (#23480154) Homepage Journal
      I agree. IBM deserves a hand for this. I'm sure it will leave a lasting impression on the laptop market.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by cerelib (903469)
      I have to agree. This is a pretty straight forward improvement to an invention patent. The patent seems to be specific on many details of implementation. It is also specific enough that it probably can't rule out any possible use of a hand impression on a portable device. While it may not be the most novel and innovative idea, it is a far cry from the software/process patents that usually appear in the "Your Rights Online" section.

  • just another take... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bsDaemon (87307) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:35PM (#23479836) Homepage
    How is this anything more than just another take on ergonomic grips on other products -- for instance the finger grooves on the grip of a pistol?

    Not that I can say I've had a problem performing this task WITHOUT their little patent, but interesting IBM would want it, seeing as how they've sold their laptop-making division already anyway.
    • You don't need to create a product to license a patent. If anyone decides to make laptops with brushed chrome (or whatever the hell the iPhone is made of), I'd welcome anything that helps me keep a grip on the things. I swear, a cold iPhone is like trying to hold onto jello...

      YRO might be because of the handprint which may, or may not, include fingerprints (to the previous poster).

    • Re:just another take... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by getto man d (619850) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:39PM (#23479924)
      FTA:
      "A hand impression is disposed on a bottom surface of the chassis base unit.

      Though this begs the question of how many people actually use a laptop in this fashion. I myself cannot see it entirely useful (e.g. typing) or comfortable.
      • feh. It brings up a question which is begging for an answer. It does not beg the question.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by gnick (1211984)

          feh. It brings up a question which is begging for an answer. It does not beg the question.
          This seems like a petty peve. It seems obvious enough that by:

          this begs the question of how many people actually use a laptop in this fashion.
          the esteemed "getto man d" meant:

          This begets the question, "How many people actually use a laptop in this fashion?"
          Double feh.
      • I tend to agree. Leg grooves to make it easier to balance on my lap would be more beneficial for my off-desk use. Mind you I also have an old, heavy, widescreen laptop. Using it while balanced on one hand would be more a feat of strength than dexterity in my case. Even still I can't imagine using a light laptop in that way.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by webrunner (108849)
          They try to downplay actual lap-top use (in case of another burn lawsuit) to the point that they almost say "do not use this on your legs"

          Notice how companies never actually call them "laptops"? They'll call them either "notebook computer" or "labtop" (as in: put on the counter of a research lab).

          Releasing one with leg grooves would be rather strange, given that.
    • Makes me want to patent an impression of my boot in the rear end of the reviewer who approved this patent.

    • How is this anything more than just another take on ergonomic grips on other products -- for instance the finger grooves on the grip of a pistol?

      This is directly from the claimed language in the independent claims of the application:

      "and a sensor disposed in the hand impression, responsive to contact by a user, for enabling or disabling a processing unit in the data processing system"

      I'd say that's very different than ergonomic gripping as it's able to enable and disable the processor itself. I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be patentable, I'm just saying you're way off with your assertion there.

  • If only they had bought the laptop division from IBM right now they cudve enjoyed this uber cool patent guaranteed to you impress your friends when you are juggling your laptop with a finger!

  • More like... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...you best not do the same on a laptop, [and then produce it for sale to other people] lest you infringe on IBM's new patent for the Portable Computer with a Hand Impression, ...

    Patents don't stop you from doing things, they stop you from making money for doing said things.

  • It's another biometrics toy. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Sierran (155611) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:39PM (#23479916)
    The handprint is there, claims the patent, in order to facilitate the 'proper carrying' of the 'computing device.' However, I don't think I've ever carried my laptop balanced like a waiter's tray, or held it to my side while closed without wrapping the carrying hand around the edge underneath it for support. What they do say, buried in the patent, is that the patent also covers the use of 'biometric devices' inside the handprint, presumably for identity verification. If so, I"m not sure how this any better than a fingerprint port, unless they plan to have biometrics cover the entire print or even all five fingers - which will be more expensive for dubious additional security.

    • Re:It's another biometrics toy. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Dachannien (617929) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:42PM (#23479978)
      It's not really "buried in the patent". It's mentioned right up front in claim 1, and the headline for this article seems oblivious to that point.

      • If you have to do any work like click through to the article or search for patent summary, it's buried as far as we're concerned.
    • "which will be more expensive for dubious additional security."

      No kidding. Does IBM think it is significantly harder to cut off a persons hand than it is to takeoff their finger?

  • This is a great idea (Score:3, Funny)

    by Lostlander (1219708) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:39PM (#23479918)
    I think I'm going to patent a process by which a footprint is left in a SiO2 water suspension and used for tracing the location of an individual.
    • It would be a pretty useless patent, as sand prints usually don't last long. However, you could patent filling the footprints with plaster for the purposes of identifying an individual, animal, plant, of fossil if the method hadn't already been used forever.

  • Looks at his Laptop... (Score:3, Funny)

    by hyperz69 (1226464) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:41PM (#23479966)
    Sees handprints all over it's exterior.

    Oh crap, I hope IBM will lease the technology to me cheaply ;\
  • I thought this was a security thing. Like nobody would steal a laptop with your unique fingerprints and entire handprint. Why hasn't anyone done that before?

  • Not obvious? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Bombula (670389) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:51PM (#23480110)
    Unless I'm mistaken, only non-obvious inventions can be protected by patents. Even if something is novel, useful, or a new combination of existing ideas, it must still be non-obvious to be patentable.

  • The next big invention... (Score:4, Funny)

    by imyy4u3 (1290108) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:53PM (#23480148)
    ...a biometric laptop that is "ergonomically designed" for being "carried" on your "lap" while looking at porn. It is called the Magnum Laptop for the big boys, and the Tiny Laptop in China.
  • Really, unless you were a hand model posing for a notebook computer advertisement, why would you hold a computer like that? It may look pretty, but the slightest sideways impact is going to send the whole thing tumbling to the ground no matter how neatly your fingertips line up with the spots on the case.
  • 1) do I have to order my laptop as right-or-left-handed now?

    2) Is it to late to get a design patent of the position of certain fingers in the hand impression? "...In one manifestation of the invention, all but the central digit are retracted..."
  • I'm wondering how well a laptop with a palm print on its bottom will handle when you put it on a table and try to type/mouse/etc. Seems to me like a very bad idea as the laptop would wobble as you try to type unless they're planning on putting legs on it.
  • The patent appears be specific (as it should be) and the same idea implemented with a different configuration (place palm in a different location) might be construed not to infringe. Perhaps then they filed it for defensive purposes; they're famous for that.

  • Insensitive bastards! (Score:4, Funny)

    by DaveV1.0 (203135) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @02:24PM (#23480638) Journal
    I don't have a hand. I have a flipper!
  • You could call it Rot180 and get your own patent, and they'd be legally prevented from decrypting it to see if it infringed upon their patent.
  • I can resell it back to any restaurant establishment and prosper. Waiters and waitresses the world over will sing my praises.
  • Obviously, someone at IBM needed to fill their patent quota for the year again.

  • Was it sized? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hurfy (735314) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @04:15PM (#23482628)
    Do i have to order my next laptop as Left or Right, how about Small, Medium, or Large?

    Didn't get far enough to see if it is just a generic hand print or custom ($$$) But my hand print won't work if they use my dad for an impression and vice-versa.

    Despite that the impression seems reasonable if only marginally useful. Putting sensors in it seems dumb tho. I don't want to HAVE to hold it that way. Not to mention, aren't most of these small computers really cheap? Adding a bevy of sensors seems counter-productive to that. ...and now i know why noone wants to RTFA...ugh

  • Balance on hand? Who cares? (Score:4, Funny)

    by PPH (736903) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @07:15PM (#23485414)
    First one to the patent office with the laptop with two kneecap impressions on the bottom wins the big bucks!
    • but what if you want to go lefty and pretent it's someone else?

    • Re:what next? (Score:5, Funny)

      by db32 (862117) on Tuesday May 20 2008, @01:49PM (#23480088) Journal
      I think if you are putting digit imprints you probably don't have a girl to worry about as that particular body part is already shaped correctly for it's corresponding girl part. The digit imprints would clearly be for those who lack access to the corresponding girl part.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.